Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] About what would be included in EAPI5
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:23:26
Message-Id: 20120616171846.0fc30af5@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] About what would be included in EAPI5 by Peter Stuge
1 On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 17:24:22 +0200
2 Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote:
3 > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
4 > > > Could it work to make automatic signatures of imported ABI, and
5 > > > simply compare signatures when a provider package is updated?
6 > >
7 > > No.
8 >
9 > Can you say why?
10
11 There's no way for a program to work out what "the ABI" of something
12 is (whatever that means), and there's even less of a way for it to know
13 up-front.
14
15 > > Also, can we stop using the term "ABI" in reference to this please?
16 > > It's misleading. Let's call them sub-slots instead.
17 >
18 > I think ABI fits well though? The situation is that A DEPENDs on B,
19 > and at some point B changes in a way that A must be rebuilt in order
20 > to run - right?
21 >
22 > The only reason that A wouldn't run anymore is that B's ABI changed?
23
24 ABI has a fairly specific, technical meaning, which can be misleading
25 in the general case. Is Python bytecode an ABI?
26
27 --
28 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] About what would be included in EAPI5 Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o>