| 1 |
On 03/09/2012 08:49 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
| 2 |
> The point was to be able to get the EAPI without crashing if the ebuild |
| 3 |
> uses newer features. If you can get the EAPI without sourcing, that |
| 4 |
> obviously accomplishes the goal. But there are other goals, too, like |
| 5 |
> not limiting the syntax of the EAPI assignment. I was just trying to |
| 6 |
> think up something that addresses them all. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Yeah, but you compromised on what can be considered our primary goal, |
| 9 |
which is to obtain the EAPI without sourcing the ebuild. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> In any case, yeah, it would crash and burn if someone synced his tree |
| 12 |
> with an ancient version of portage. But so would the comment solution. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Don't forget the possibility of bash syntax extensions triggering a |
| 15 |
syntax error [1]. The comment and bash assignment solutions are immune |
| 16 |
to that because bash is exceedingly unlikely to break backward |
| 17 |
compatibility in the comment and bash assignment syntax. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
[1] |
| 20 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_2c1fbbb32f5bc47756303ca18055bee4.xml |
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Thanks, |
| 23 |
Zac |
Archives