On 2007/12/18, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:10:46 -0700 > Joe Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I probably missed some of the stuff leading up to this GLEP, but > > what is the problem with having the EAPI in the file and > > determining it by looking at the file contents? > > Motivation, second bullet point: > > | Possibility to extend the behaviour of inherit and add new global > | scope functions (as a result of not sourcing ebuilds with > | unsupported EAPI).
Why can't it be in the file but readable without sourcing? For instance, it could be mandatory that EAPI=X, if present, must be the first non-blank and non-comment line of the ebuild (and it would then be checked after sourcing, if the ebuild is sourced, to bug on cases where it's redefined or unset afterwards). -- TGL. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
