List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
>>>>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 11:59:33 -0500
> Alexandre Rostovtsev <email@example.com> wrote:
>> In light of the fact that all 29758 ebuilds in portage already
>> satisfy the proposed whitespace, quoting, and indenting constrains
>> on EAPI assignment, the probability of problems appears to be
>> vanishingly small. And "vanishingly small" and can be reduced to
>> zero by simply adding a check to repoman.
> Because they were recently changed, presumably...
> We had this discussion the last time around too, and people were
> told to assign in a particular way. As you can see, it didn't work.
Sorry, but this is nonsense (or rather FUD). Indeed we had 3 ebuilds
(0.01%) in the Portage tree where parsing resulted in an EAPI
different from the one in metadata.
In one of them, removal of the old assignment statement had simply
been forgotten . For the other two, the EAPI had been assigned by
an eclass , which we consider illegal anyway.