Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [GLEP] Use EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (.ebuild-EAPI)

[Fernando J. Pereda]

On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 06:01:04PM +0800, Zhang Le wrote:
> >
> > Your algorithm:
> >
> > Does not work for existing ebuilds that have implicit EAPI 0.
>
> That's obvious. If no suffix, just treat it as EAPI 0.
> I thought I don't need to say this explicitly.

'# Copyright 1999-2007 Gentoo Foundation'

Is that an EAPI? of course it is not, are you going to hardcode every
possible ebuild header in your stupid _hack_ ?

> >
> > Does not work for existing ebuilds that have explicit EAPI.
>
> Even better, since we don't need suffix in the first place. Just define it in
> ebuild.

What?

> >
> > Does not work for future ebuilds.
>
> If defined in file does not work, then define in file name doesn't either.
> They are interchangeable.

No, they are not.

> All could be get before sourcing.
> I know you'd say people will use all syntaxes to define. But how many are
> there? EAPI=1, EAPI="1" these are the two ways currently used in tree.
> A simple qgrep can show that.
> Two steps can guarantee you get the value
> 1. strip "
> 2. get the value

And then you are stuck FOREVER into defining EAPI as a variable.

You clearly haven't read anything on this thread. I suggest you go and
do so before making a fool of yourself again. Please.

Please guys, keep in mind that the fact that some of you understand what
a filename is and are able to provide simple commands that extract a
particular line from a file does not entitle you with the knowdledge
required to contribute something useful to this discussion.

- ferdy

-- 
Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín
20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED  ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4