| 1 |
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 16:38:06 -0400 |
| 2 |
"Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 12:53:15PM +0200, Ralph Sennhauser wrote |
| 4 |
> > From time to time the topic of deprecating EAPIs comes up and |
| 5 |
> > usually one suggestion is to keep 0 and start with converting EAPI |
| 6 |
> > 1 ebuilds. Then someone comes along and asks what is the point? |
| 7 |
> > Indeed, a fair question. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> It's my understanding that higher EAPI levels include more features. |
| 10 |
> How backwards compatable are the EAPI levels? I.e. assume that we |
| 11 |
> take an ebuild with EAPI 0, and slap in EAPI=1 (or 2 or 3, etc) at |
| 12 |
> the top, without any other changes. Are there any circumstances |
| 13 |
> where the ebuild would behave differently and/or break? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
In EAPIs after 1, as well as adding shiny new toys, we've removed |
| 16 |
various deprecated things, split up phase functions, and made some |
| 17 |
helpers error on invalid input. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives