| 1 |
2009/5/18 Steven J Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>: |
| 2 |
> David Leverton wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> 2009/5/17 Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o>: |
| 5 |
>>> I think the way eapi-2 was introduced into the tree wasn't particularly |
| 6 |
>>> problematic. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I think there might be a misunderstanding here. Ciaran means functions |
| 9 |
>> provided by the package manager that ebuilds can call during metadata |
| 10 |
>> generation, for example built-in versionator-like functionality, not |
| 11 |
>> new phase functions like src_prepare and src_configure. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Ugh. Firstly versionator is a piece of bloated crap that should have died a |
| 14 |
> long time ago; all it does is stop Gentoo newbs learning the basics[1] of |
| 15 |
> their implementation language, which leaves them open to nonsensical |
| 16 |
> arguments about printf -v (glad you finally learnt that one, btw.) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes, it should have died a long time ago, that's why we're talking |
| 19 |
about adding equivalent built-in functionality. Please try to keep |
| 20 |
up. (And it's always amusing to see your bizarre delusions about what |
| 21 |
I do and don't know.) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> Secondly, please explain fully and clearly, but concisely, why we can't |
| 24 |
> simply state that EAPI=NN allows the ebuild to use the EAPI functions in |
| 25 |
> global scope. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Because by the time the package manager knows the EAPI and is in a |
| 28 |
position to provide the appropriate functions, the ebuild will have |
| 29 |
already tried to use them. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Bear in mind that you have to deal with the case of the mangler which can |
| 32 |
> get EAPI from an ebuild without sourcing, as portage currently can, I |
| 33 |
> believe. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Interesting.... |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Relaxing that restriction strikes me as much saner than relaxing all the |
| 38 |
> other restrictions which make interoperability easier. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> (Frankly, I'm amazed at having to state that to people trusted to write a |
| 41 |
> specification. Follow up to -project on this point please, as it's about |
| 42 |
> process, not technique.) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
You're amazed that people trusted to write a specification don't |
| 45 |
already know what "strikes you as much saner"? Believe it or not, the |
| 46 |
world does not revolve around you and your opinions. |
Archives