Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o>
Subject: Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 18:28:44 +0100
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 10:56:21 -0500
Michael Orlitzky <michael@...> wrote:

> On 03/08/2012 07:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>
> >> Someone suggested using a standard shebang the last time this came
> >> up, and if I remember correctly it was one of the
> >> least-disagreeable solutions proposed. We could of course define
> >> our own custom format, but I think something like,
> >>
> >>     #!/usr/bin/eapi5
> >>
> >> would be perfect if we could hand off the interpretation of the
> >> ebuild to that program. That solves the problem with new bash
> >> features, too, since you could point that command at a specific
> >> version.
> >
> > And what would /usr/bin/eapi5 do? Are you suggesting misusing
> > shebang or making ebuilds PM-centric?
> >
> 
> I was saying that I'd prefer a more-standard use of the shebang (if 
> possible), rather than defining our own header comment syntax. Either 
> way I think the second option is cleaner than regular expressions.
> 
> Right now, we're guaranteed the features of bash-3.2. I guess we 
> actually use whatever is executing ebuild.sh to source them. But we
> need to interpret the ebuild file with something: we might as well
> put *that* in the shebang, since that's what it's for.
> 
> So if we were to do this with an ebuild right now, we'd add,
> 
>    #!/usr/bin/eapi4
> 
> to the header, and instead of sourcing the ebuild with whatever 
> ebuild.sh is using, we would run it with 'eapi4' and pass whatever we 
> need back and forth. Or maybe ebuild.sh would reload itself using 
> 'eapi4'. If any of that makes sense, the PMS would just need to
> specify some requirements on the shebang command.

And something will need to provide that /usr/bin/eapi4 thing. And that
introduces new problems:

1) how are we going to support multiple package managers? will we need
to install eapi4 thing as a smart wrapper choosing the right PM?

2) what about Prefix? #!/usr/bin/env eapi4 then, or proactive updating
of shebangs in synced ebuilds? and then regenerating the whole cache
(guess how long does it take to update it),

3) what should happen if user executes ebuild? the ebuild should merge
itself? with dependencies or without?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
Attachment:
signature.asc (PGP signature)
Replies:
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
-- Michael Orlitzky
References:
RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
-- Ulrich Mueller
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
-- Michael Orlitzky
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
-- Michał Górny
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
-- Michael Orlitzky
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Next by thread:
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Previous by date:
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Next by date:
Re: RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.