Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Marc Schiffbauer <mschiff@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 09:59:20
Message-Id: 20120308094222.GA21435@lisa.schiffbauer.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds by Ulrich Mueller
1 * Ulrich Mueller schrieb am 08.03.12 um 08:27 Uhr:
2 > >>>>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Alec Warner wrote:
3 >
4 > >> *** Proposal 1: "Parse the EAPI assignment statement" ***
5 > >> [...]
6 >
7 > > I don't like this idea because the sane way should be easy and
8 > > straightforward. Mixing a constant declaration with bash assignment
9 > > just confuses users who think the assignment is full bash when in
10 > > fact it is not.
11 >
12 > > EAPI=$(somefunc)
13 > > EAPI=${SOMEVAR%%-*}
14 > > and so forth all don't meet the regex (and would be flagged
15 > > invalid.) However a naive author might think they work.
16 >
17 > Such constructs also cannot be used with any of the other proposed
18 > solutions. And in fact, nobody is using such things in practice.
19 > _All_ ebuilds in the Portage tree can be successfully parsed with the
20 > regexp proposed.
21
22 Ebuilds are bash scripts. I think introducing exceptions or
23 constraints here is not straightforward.
24
25 I think the only relevant part whether EAPI is set correctly or not
26 should be the outcome of $EAPI.
27
28 I would vote for a solution in a bash comment where repoman would
29 have to check for its existance and equality to $EAPI.
30
31 -Marc
32 --
33 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>