Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael Orlitzky <michael@××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:57:26
Message-Id: 4F58D6A5.7070804@orlitzky.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds by "Michał Górny"
1 On 03/08/2012 07:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
2 >>
3 >> Someone suggested using a standard shebang the last time this came
4 >> up, and if I remember correctly it was one of the least-disagreeable
5 >> solutions proposed. We could of course define our own custom format,
6 >> but I think something like,
7 >>
8 >> #!/usr/bin/eapi5
9 >>
10 >> would be perfect if we could hand off the interpretation of the
11 >> ebuild to that program. That solves the problem with new bash
12 >> features, too, since you could point that command at a specific
13 >> version.
14 >
15 > And what would /usr/bin/eapi5 do? Are you suggesting misusing shebang
16 > or making ebuilds PM-centric?
17 >
18
19 I was saying that I'd prefer a more-standard use of the shebang (if
20 possible), rather than defining our own header comment syntax. Either
21 way I think the second option is cleaner than regular expressions.
22
23 Right now, we're guaranteed the features of bash-3.2. I guess we
24 actually use whatever is executing ebuild.sh to source them. But we need
25 to interpret the ebuild file with something: we might as well put *that*
26 in the shebang, since that's what it's for.
27
28 So if we were to do this with an ebuild right now, we'd add,
29
30 #!/usr/bin/eapi4
31
32 to the header, and instead of sourcing the ebuild with whatever
33 ebuild.sh is using, we would run it with 'eapi4' and pass whatever we
34 need back and forth. Or maybe ebuild.sh would reload itself using
35 'eapi4'. If any of that makes sense, the PMS would just need to specify
36 some requirements on the shebang command.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>