Zac Medico wrote: >> Plus, once we have this, it looks to me that nobody has to wait for >> EAPI=1 in order to use whatever portage feature that's needed by an >> ebuild. So we can all stop complaining about not having EAPI=1 in the >> form we wanted or at all, and get back to writing ebuilds. > > For metadata syntax changes, such as IUSE defaults, a simple portage > dependency won't work. In that case EAPI is needed in order to > prevent older versions of portage from interpreting new ebuilds in > ways that are not intended (leading to unpredictable results). > Is there a cut-off for portage atm wrt versions you do not support?
I'm wondering at what point you can say we don't support less than 2.1.2. It seems odd that a distro which operates like Gentoo would not cut off support for old versions in line with the rest of the tree, when binary ones do (which is why ubuntu LTS was attractive.) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
