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 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,
>> 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
> 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,
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.