On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 21:34:49 +0100 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2010-11-28 21:20:31 Michał Górny napisał(a): > > On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 20:32:16 +0100 > > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > PYTHON_DEPEND will be required. Otherwise each > > > "${range_of_versions}" should be included between "<<" and ">>" > > > markers. > > > > Do we really need to introduce those ugly markers? AFAICS in all > > places they're used you could simply either use version numbers > > themselves or '*' (instead of '<<>>', and '*[...]' instead of > > '<<[...]>>'). > > I prefer to use a character sequence, which isn't valid in > DEPEND/RDEPEND/PDEPEND. Plain version numbers aren't valid there as well. > I don't know what you mean by "version numbers". Remember that each > "<<>>" in an ebuild with empty RESTRICT_PYTHON_ABIS is replaced in > DEPEND/RDEPEND by: python_abis_2.4? ( dev-lang/python:2.4 ) > python_abis_2.5? ( dev-lang/python:2.5 ) > python_abis_2.6? ( dev-lang/python:2.6 ) > python_abis_2.7? ( dev-lang/python:2.7 ) > python_abis_3.0? ( dev-lang/python:3.0 ) > python_abis_3.1? ( dev-lang/python:3.1 ) > python_abis_3.2? ( dev-lang/python:3.2 ) > python_abis_2.5-jython? ( dev-java/jython:2.5 ) And we could use simply '*' instead. Similarly to what we use in PYTHON_DEPEND now. That wouldn't be valid in *DEPEND as well. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
