Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael Orlitzky <michael@××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:57:26
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds by "Michał Górny"
On 03/08/2012 07:03 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> >> Someone suggested using a standard shebang the last time this came >> up, and if I remember correctly it was one of the least-disagreeable >> solutions proposed. We could of course define our own custom format, >> but I think something like, >> >> #!/usr/bin/eapi5 >> >> would be perfect if we could hand off the interpretation of the >> ebuild to that program. That solves the problem with new bash >> features, too, since you could point that command at a specific >> version. > > And what would /usr/bin/eapi5 do? Are you suggesting misusing shebang > or making ebuilds PM-centric? >
I was saying that I'd prefer a more-standard use of the shebang (if possible), rather than defining our own header comment syntax. Either way I think the second option is cleaner than regular expressions. Right now, we're guaranteed the features of bash-3.2. I guess we actually use whatever is executing to source them. But we need to interpret the ebuild file with something: we might as well put *that* in the shebang, since that's what it's for. So if we were to do this with an ebuild right now, we'd add, #!/usr/bin/eapi4 to the header, and instead of sourcing the ebuild with whatever is using, we would run it with 'eapi4' and pass whatever we need back and forth. Or maybe would reload itself using 'eapi4'. If any of that makes sense, the PMS would just need to specify some requirements on the shebang command.


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFD: EAPI specification in ebuilds "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>