| 1 |
On 18-12-2007 00:39:38 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> An EAPI is not limited to a numeric name. We could call the next EAPI |
| 3 |
> "cabbage" if we wanted to. There're already various experimental EAPIs |
| 4 |
> that don't use pure numbers (for example, "paludis-1"). |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> (Sometimes I think the next EAPI *should* be called "cabbage", if only |
| 7 |
> because it'll help disabuse people of the notion that EAPIs are |
| 8 |
> orderable...) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
While I feel there has been given little to no attention to what EAPI's |
| 11 |
really are and how they relate to each other, I prefer to go this route |
| 12 |
myself as well. The EAPI "name" should represent the feature(s) it |
| 13 |
adds. However, because "features" need not to include previous ones |
| 14 |
(why would they?), in the Prefix branch of Portage I implemented EAPI to |
| 15 |
be a space separated list. I merely did this because EAPI=1 ebuilds |
| 16 |
needed to be tagged as such in an EAPI="prefix" ebuild, and the features |
| 17 |
EAPI="prefix" adds are ortogonal on the features EAPI=0 or EAPI=1 ... |
| 18 |
provides. As a result I now have EAPI="prefix 1" ebuilds. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Since you seem to argue here that EAPIs are not orderable, I get the |
| 21 |
impression you imply these "combinations" of EAPIs to be desirable. In |
| 22 |
that case, what would the extension of the ebuild be like? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 27 |
Gentoo on a different level |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives