On Sat, 2019-12-14 at 12:29 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > > > > On Sat, 14 Dec 2019, David Seifert wrote:
> > case "${EAPI:-0}" in
> > - 0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7)
> > + [01234])
> > + die "Unsupported EAPI=${EAPI:-0} (too old) for
> > ${ECLASS}"
> > + ;;
> > + [567])
> > ;;
> > *)
> > die "Unsupported EAPI=${EAPI} (unknown) for ${ECLASS}"
>
> I know that this exists in other eclasses as well, but do we really
> need
> that distinction in the error message for "too old" and "unknown"
> EAPIs?
> It should be pretty clear which case applies there, especially since
> the
> message is addressed at developers, not users.
>
> Ulrich
Also, it makes egencache failures in overlays more descriptive, and
hence I'd keep it for the time being.
