| 1 |
Brian - |
| 2 |
Thanks for chiming in here. And thanks for your efforts. (I was able |
| 3 |
to meet Seemant in India two weeks ago, and he couldn't say enough |
| 4 |
good about you). |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
On 12/16/05, Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 05:51:26PM -0800, m h wrote: |
| 8 |
> > While I'm firing off questions, any hints as to why there are no |
| 9 |
> > ebuilds to satisfy bash? (I'm starting through the depgraph code, but |
| 10 |
> > it is hairy and ugly....) |
| 11 |
> prefix portage _only_ allows using EAPI="prefix" ebuilds right now. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Down the line, if prefix is approved/integrated, then an actual EAPI |
| 14 |
> release will be used instead of the fake one created. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Either way, why there are no ebuilds is due to portage automatically |
| 17 |
> filtering out all ebuilds that lack a matching EAPI. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> It's a protection feature, if portage doesn't know of that EAPI level, |
| 20 |
> it won't allow the user to use it. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
As far as I understand EAPI is used to define a sort of super class |
| 23 |
(in OO terms) for an ebuild. (Feel free to correct). |
| 24 |
I'm using Kito's prefixed ebuilds, which have the line |
| 25 |
EAPI="prefix" |
| 26 |
in them. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I'm not specifying the overlay right now, but I'm sure there are other |
| 29 |
environment errors. I'm assumming if I deal with them, this issue |
| 30 |
will go away. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
matt |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
Archives