| 1 |
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>>>>>>> On Fri, 06 Mar 2009, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Any thoughts? |
| 5 |
>>> + *) |
| 6 |
>>> + die "Unknown EAPI ${EAPI}" |
| 7 |
>>> + ;; |
| 8 |
>> Is is safe to assume that an unknown EAPI will provide a "die" |
| 9 |
>> function? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> If we get all Ciaran-ey about that, then we can't even assume the |
| 13 |
> existence of a case statement in some future version of bash (which is |
| 14 |
> required by some EAPI) |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I think in these cases we just have to use common sense. If a function |
| 19 |
is deprecated or "known to be 'on the way out'" then using them would |
| 20 |
obviously be a bad idea. On the other hand even if they are used, |
| 21 |
surely someone would test an ebuild and discover this case pretty quickly. |
Archives