-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Marius Mauch wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:52:37 +0200
> "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o> wrote:
> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
>>> On Saturday 28 June 2008 17:03:13 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
>>>> PV=${PV/0./}
>>>>
>>>> to that new ebuild. This is the cleanest way to do it and doesn't
>>>> require any variable name changes or any other changes to the
>>>> ebuild regardless of what it does. Unfortunately it is also
>>>> illegal per current PMS as PV is a read-only variable. Right now I
>>>> feel that the gain of having PV read-only (catch a few bugs?) is
>>>> much lower than the pain (extensive ebuild-dependend changes when
>>>> the version scheme changes). Please comment.
>>> I don't really see how making PV not read-only is any easier than
>>> using MY_PV. Did you expect changing PV to magically change P, PVR
>>> and PF too?
>> If we can agree to have those values writable we could define a
>> function that will handle resetting all those too.
> 
> Not going to happen. These variables are used internally by portage in
> various ways, and making their content inconsistent with the version in
> the filename is likely to cause subtle bugs and/or weird behavior.
> Besides, you've yet to explain the benefit of it, short of avoiding a
> simple replace operation in an ebuild, and the given use case isn't all
> that common anyway.

Why can't portage use its own variables and export these with an initial value
but not use them further?

Marijn

- --
Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML
<http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkhntjYACgkQp/VmCx0OL2yxdgCght6buiC3nTWqQiaADBOVR2Xw
ezYAnA57T74GJ6izX2mk8XuOX/c8MyL4
=zW3N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list