| 1 |
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 12:35:43AM -0400, Richard Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ravi Pinjala wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Nick Fortino wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Such a transformation is possible, given the restrictions on arg, as |
| 5 |
>>> well as ebuild format. |
| 6 |
>> Isn't this a bit circular? The whole point of wanting to change the |
| 7 |
>> extension is to get rid of exactly these restrictions; if you assume the |
| 8 |
>> restrictions, then the whole thing is kind of pointless. :) |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> What restrictions? The restriction that EAPI be fixed on the 5th line of |
| 11 |
> the build, or the restriction that EAPI be fixed in the filename. I don't |
| 12 |
> really see much difference between them. What can the one do that the |
| 13 |
> other can't. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The difference is that putting the EAPI in the filename has backwards |
| 16 |
compatibility because package managers not knowing about this change |
| 17 |
won't even look at the those ebuilds. Putting EAPI as the fifth line |
| 18 |
completely loses this, so as far as backwards compatibility goes putting |
| 19 |
EAPI 55 in the filename really is the cleanest. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
--------- |
| 23 |
Thomas Anderson |
| 24 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 25 |
///////// |
| 26 |
Areas of responsibility: |
| 27 |
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council |
| 28 |
--------- |
Archives