1 |
Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: |
2 |
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 17:18:45 +0100 |
3 |
> Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <chithanh@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
>> Assume a new version 13.37 of your package manager drops EAPI=1 |
5 |
>> support. So package-manager-13.37.ebuild checks in pkg_pretend() if |
6 |
>> any EAPI=1 package is installed on the system. If yes, then it |
7 |
>> aborts, telling the user to get rid of the package first. |
8 |
> Oh, now I get it. There are two issues there... |
9 |
> |
10 |
> First, doing that is going to screw things up for users who have two |
11 |
> package managers installed, unless you make every package mangler's |
12 |
> package aware of every package mangler. |
13 |
|
14 |
As long as the package managers are installed through ebuilds, they |
15 |
should observe each other's pkg_pretend() |
16 |
|
17 |
> Second, there's not a way of getting the information you need to figure |
18 |
> that out using current EAPIs. |
19 |
|
20 |
That I suspected, that's why I asked about feasibility. |
21 |
"grep 1 $(portageq vdb_path)/*/*/EAPI && die" might work for portage and |
22 |
its current VDB layout. |
23 |
One problem that remains with this approach is what happens if an EAPI=1 |
24 |
package is in the list of packages to be merged along with the new |
25 |
package manager. |
26 |
|
27 |
> It's also not really worth it at the moment. There aren't any major |
28 |
> architectural changes between EAPIs just now, so removing support for |
29 |
> an EAPI won't allow any majorly nasty code to be removed from a package |
30 |
> manager. It might be worth revisiting this if we ever switch to EAPIs |
31 |
> that allow us to kill off VDB, for example. |
32 |
|
33 |
Yes, tommy already told me on IRC that there is no incentive for package |
34 |
managers to drop EAPI support at this time. |
35 |
|
36 |
|
37 |
Best regards, |
38 |
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |