Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: bzr.eclass into Portage
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:29:54
Message-Id: 18674.60125.318827.567899@a1ihome1.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: bzr.eclass into Portage by Steve Long
1 >>>>> On Mon, 13 Oct 2008, Steve Long wrote:
2
3 > No objections, a minor point wrt bash:
4
5 > EBZR_OPTIONS="${EBZR_OPTIONS:-}" (and similar variants)
6 > doesn't do anything (beyond waste lex and yacc time.)
7
8 It does something, namely assigns an empty string if the variable was
9 undefined before. ;-) git.eclass and mercurial.eclass do
10 : ${EGIT_OPTIONS:=}
11 which has the same effect.
12
13 I've left these statements in for now, since I don't see how they
14 could harm. Does anyone else have an opinion here? I'm not really
15 decided about this point.
16
17 > [[ -z ${EBZR_REPO_URI} ]] && die ..
18 > Here's how I'd write that:
19 > [[ $EBZR_REPO_URI ]] || die ..
20
21 Applied. (However, I didn't remove the curly braces which are Gentoo
22 "house style".)
23
24 > I've heard the "be explicit" argument before (hey antarus;) and
25 > here's why I disagree:
26 > If you don't know test (''help test'') and what its default is, then
27 > you really don't know the basics of shellscript (you possibly only
28 > think you do.) If you don't know shell, and can't begin to
29 > understand what that might do, then you shouldn't consider coding as
30 > a career, and I'd expect you to take quite a while to go through the
31 > #bash crucible; if you ever make it I'd have a lot of time for you.
32
33 Don't use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The above is purely a
34 question of coding style and personal preferences.
35
36 > Given that, is there any reason not to use 1.6 if installed, and
37 > fallback to an earlier version if not?
38
39 Of course not. The dependency is DEPEND=">=dev-util/bzr-1.5".
40
41 Ulrich