[gentoo-dev] Re: RFD : .ebuild is only bash

[Duncan]

Kent Fredric posted on Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:14:23 +1300 as excerpted:

> Eh? How? If you make "." a forbidden character in an eapi
> specificiation,
> and make "." the delimiter
>
>   dev-foo/foo-bar-2.3.4.eapi5.eb
>
> ^^^^
>
> How does that require regex?
>
> remove the .eb  , and the last token remaining is the eapi .
>
> it doesn't clash with the existing system for 2 reasons, 1) the .eb
> extension   and 2)  "eapi5" is not a valid version token

That's logical, but as pointed out, the originally proposed delimiter was 
-, so dev-foo/foo-bar-2.3.4-eapi5.eb, which is a bit different.

I've wondered about other delimiters, too.  : seems obvious, but also 
rather likely to screw stuff up.  What about something like ^ :
dev-foo/foo-bar-2.3.4^eapi5.eb ? Or +  dev-foo/foo-bar-2.3.4+eapi5.eb ?


But my real reason for this post, and mostly picking your post to reply 
to as it's a convenient demonstration of .eb...

Someone raised the point about "eb" being taken as a swear word in 
Russian.  That might not be enough to derail it as the only choice, just 
as .fuck if it was the only thing available shouldn't be derailed, but 
surely there's other possible choices that aren't so objectionable.

I haven't seen these suggested yet:

.ebld .ebd .bld .dliube (backward, like xvid/vidx) .dlbe .be (ok, that's 
a 2-letter national code, but is it a swear word anywhere? if not I'd say 
it's still better).

We could even do an inside joke on eb/ebb and make it .flow ... or for 
that matter, .eflow or .ebflow =:^)

Some of those might have their own negative connotations or indeed, 
simply look too ugly, but that's the reason I'm asking.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman