1 |
On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:41:09 -0800 |
2 |
Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 03/09/2012 07:21 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: |
5 |
> > The advantage that the eapi function has over a comment is that |
6 |
> > it's not magic -- it's just normal bash syntax. So we've addressed |
7 |
> > that issue at a small performance cost (we're really only sourcing |
8 |
> > the ebuild up to 'exit'). |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Also consider the case where a user syncs after not having updated |
11 |
> for a couple of months, and the tree contains some ebuilds with EAPIs |
12 |
> that are not supported by the currently installed package manager. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> In this case, when resolving dependencies and filtering ebuilds based |
15 |
> on whether or not their EAPI is supported, spawning bash once per |
16 |
> ebuild is much more costly than the alternatives. |
17 |
|
18 |
isnt the whole point of the proposal to get eapi without sourcing ? |
19 |
|
20 |
so that we can use new bash features at local or global scope without |
21 |
risking that people with an old bash get syntax errors trying to get |
22 |
the eapi |