* Ulrich Mueller schrieb am 08.03.12 um 08:27 Uhr:
> >>>>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2012, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> >> *** Proposal 1: "Parse the EAPI assignment statement" ***
> >> [...]
>
> > I don't like this idea because the sane way should be easy and
> > straightforward. Mixing a constant declaration with bash assignment
> > just confuses users who think the assignment is full bash when in
> > fact it is not.
>
> > EAPI=$(somefunc)
> > EAPI=${SOMEVAR%%-*}
> > and so forth all don't meet the regex (and would be flagged
> > invalid.) However a naive author might think they work.
>
> Such constructs also cannot be used with any of the other proposed
> solutions. And in fact, nobody is using such things in practice.
> _All_ ebuilds in the Portage tree can be successfully parsed with the
> regexp proposed.Ebuilds are bash scripts. I think introducing exceptions or constraints here is not straightforward. I think the only relevant part whether EAPI is set correctly or not should be the outcome of $EAPI. I would vote for a solution in a bash comment where repoman would have to check for its existance and equality to $EAPI. -Marc -- 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
pgpiOirLF4AWG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
