| 1 |
On 09/15/2011 05:20 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2011-09-16 01:54:44 Brian Harring napisał(a): |
| 3 |
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:21:55AM +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> 2011-09-15 09:55:08 Ciaran McCreesh napisał(a): |
| 5 |
>>>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:35:21 +0200 |
| 6 |
>>>> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>>>> Could you point me to at least a single program not supporting dots |
| 8 |
>>>>> in useflags? My quick check shows that all PMs handle them well, quse |
| 9 |
>>>>> and euse as well. |
| 10 |
>>>> |
| 11 |
>>>> Hrm, it's rather disappointing that they're accepted everywhere. That |
| 12 |
>>>> really shouldn't happen... My excuse for Paludis is that I never quite |
| 13 |
>>>> got around to passing in additional flags to validation of names, and |
| 14 |
>>>> dots are legal in exheres-0 |
| 15 |
>>> |
| 16 |
>>> There is no reason for Gentoo to be worse than Exherbo and not allow dots in USE flags. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> Seriously Arfrever, drop the rhetoric here, and go fix the profile |
| 19 |
>> compatibility issue. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I suggest to support files with "-${EAPI}" suffix. |
| 22 |
> Examples: |
| 23 |
> profiles/package.mask-5 |
| 24 |
> profiles/use.desc-5 |
| 25 |
> profiles/base/package.mask-5 |
| 26 |
> profiles/base/package.use-5 |
| 27 |
> profiles/base/package.use.force-5 |
| 28 |
> profiles/base/package.use.mask-5 |
| 29 |
> profiles/base/use.force-5 |
| 30 |
> profiles/base/use.mask-5 |
| 31 |
> profiles/desc/python_abis.desc-5 |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I'd prefer not to use separate files per eapi, since that effectively |
| 35 |
gives you multiple profiles that behave differently depending on the |
| 36 |
supported EAPI of the package manager. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
As an alternative, I suggest to use the 'eapi' file to specify the EAPI |
| 39 |
for all files in the directory. If you want to roll out EAPI 5 profiles |
| 40 |
sooner, then you can fork a new base profile that only supports EAPI 5 |
| 41 |
or later, and base new profiles off of that. Bumping the EAPI of the |
| 42 |
root profiles/eapi file would be a different matter, since it applies to |
| 43 |
the whole repository. If you want to version bump that repository-level |
| 44 |
EAPI, then you need to wait until at least 6 months after supporting |
| 45 |
package managers have been available in stable. |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
Thanks, |
| 48 |
Zac |
Archives