On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 06:03:12 +0000 Steve Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Set the EAPI inside the ebuild in a way that makes it easy to > fetch it This is ok as atm only EAPI=1 is in the tree, so there is no > backward compatibility issue.
It's both a backwards and a forwards compatibility issue. > * Have a new ebuild/eclass extension ".eapi-$EAPI" > This is for ebuilds for other package managers; it is envisaged by > some that this will become the new ebuild format since it enables > quick access to the EAPI without accessing the file contents. Full > ebuild names are the primary key for the portage database. Full ebuild names as a primary key is bad. It means you have to normalise versions early on -- equality and equivalence are different for ebuild names already. And eclasses are an entirely separate issue. They need to be dealt with differently, ideally starting with EAPI 2. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
