Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI-2 do* functions die
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:19:29
Message-Id: 20080909181915.4af7f2c5@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI-2 do* functions die by Peter Volkov
1 On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:45:52 +0400
2 Peter Volkov <pva@g.o> wrote:
3 > В Пнд, 08/09/2008 в 23:34 +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto пишет:
4 > > So we're talking about adding the following to EAPI-2:
5 >
6 > While it's not too late. Can we make dobin, doman and other do*
7 > functions finally die in EAPI=2? I've reviewed discussions on -dev
8 > [1],[2] and bug 138792 [3] and seems that the only possible stopper is
9 > that implementing them as functions makes impossible to use them with
10 > xargs. Maybe for such rather rare case we should create new functions
11 > (xdo{bin,*} or whatever name is better)?
12
13 I'd suggest holding off on that one. There're at least three different
14 ways of implementing it, all with different implications, and it needs
15 proper discussion.
16
17 * Using traps looks nice on the surface, but in practice they're
18 sufficiently weird on things like conditionals that they're probably not
19 a useful solution.
20
21 * Banning xargs and doing them as functions is a possibility, but far
22 from ideal, especially since it's just working around a Portage
23 limitation.
24
25 * Making Portage support subprocess dies is the nice solution, but this
26 probably isn't an EAPI 2 timeframe feature.
27
28 In addition, having nonfatal versions of commands is also useful in
29 practice. Exheres has a 'nonfatal' command, so you can do 'nonfatal
30 dodoc foo bar baz'. This also needs discussing before deciding upon a
31 spec.
32
33 --
34 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

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