-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 20/09/12 10:26 AM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 10:14:32 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius
> <a...@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> And, for support to be official for ebuilds or eclasses to query
>> IUSE (or other globals) within phase functions, then the 'spec'
>> (PMS) is probably all that needs to be 'fixed'.  Right?
> 
> First someone would have to check very very carefully that it's
> now supported everywhere, including when using binaries, when doing
> VDB loading, etc. We'd also have to make sure we're not going to be
> hit by bash changing the behaviour of 'source' again...
> 
>> So, in EAPI=6, we propose something that'll make it official (ie
>> a querying function; or ensure that PMs can provide these
>> variables along with their proper 'effective' values, or their
>> in-ebuild 'explicit' values, or whatever it is we want to say can
>> be relied upon, to the environment).
> 
> You'll have to be very very specific about where it will and won't 
> work. It definitely won't work everywhere in global scope, for
> example.
> 
> There's also the question of whether we effectively want to force 
> merging and normalising of variables to be done on the bash side,
> rather than inside the package mangler.
> 

*nod*

I'm not tied to a particular implementation, rather just that the
values of some of these global vars (IUSE, for instance) do seem to
have a need to be available for querying during phase functions (and
PMS will need to be updated to make this legal, via i assume a future
EAPI)

That said, since some vars are and must be made available from global
scope (ie, "${S}"), I expect that it shouldn't be difficult to enforce
effective ${IUSE} no matter what possible things bash might change.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iF4EAREIAAYFAlBbKswACgkQ2ugaI38ACPBAQAD/YwjnXJGgLTQ0Fhcv6XpHkCAc
HokQhnN9i2Mu1aYikZcA/2bKlBCnVaPkjB7bQu1S+1BM8MAlmUi410IdYyYMldjn
=Fp3a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to