| 1 |
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 12:35:11PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> For backwards compatibility with existing ebuilds, yes we will probably |
| 4 |
> still need the metadata cache since we'll still have some kind of bash |
| 5 |
> linkage. It's important to point out that the design of portage-ng will |
| 6 |
> not be tied to ebuilds. Ebuilds will likely become "legacy" build |
| 7 |
> scripts that are superceded by something a lot better, cleaner, powerful |
| 8 |
> and also faster for portage-ng. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Please keep in mind that a significant number of users have expressed a |
| 12 |
fondness for ebuilds precisely because they can apply simple bash |
| 13 |
scripting knowledge to create a complex build script. Any new format |
| 14 |
should probably aim for similar syntax for precisely that reason. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
(But this is getting way ahead of things.) |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Jon Portnoy |
| 20 |
avenj/irc.freenode.net |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives