Michael Haubenwallner <ha...@gentoo.org> posted 1243584886.27150.33.ca...@sapc154.salomon.at, excerpted below, on Fri, 29 May 2009 10:14:46 +0200:
> Ohw, the latter would be necessary here, or '4.ebuild' would not be > found. s/4.ebuild/4.eclass/ I assume. > Btw.: What do non-EAPI-aware PMs do with ebuilds using EAPI 1 and 2 - > how become they masked _now_? What did I miss here? They used the old "wait an extended period (loosely speaking, a year) after initial stabilization of a new feature before use" method. EAPI was supposed to do away with that, since once EAPI aware PMs could be assumed (after the year or whatever waiting period), any EAPI a PM didn't understand was supposed to be rejected. Except... since an ebuild must presently be sourced to (properly) determine EAPI, it still doesn't work for changes that break sourcing or other pre-EAPI processing (like parsing PN and PVR out of the filename), so the changes allowed with a simple EAPI change are still rather limited. That's why the change to GLEP55 or alternative, whether in-filename or in-file-itself, will again require either an extended wait after introduction (the old way) or at minimum, a one-time change to extension such that old PM versions don't even see the currently EAPI incompatible changes. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
