On 5 August 2010 04:27, Brian Harring <ferri...@gmail.com> wrote: > If an EAPI adds a new global function that cannot set/influence EAPI, > PM's that don't support that EAPI will spit complaints about 'missing > command' during sourcing- however the PM will still see the EAPI value > is one it knows it doesn't support, and act accordingly.
You're suggesting a system based around ebuilds running commands that don't exist and ignoring the errors, which is a pretty blatant hack. While I don't think it's /absolutely/ out of the question, as I said earlier, I can see why some people would exclude it from consideration entirely.
