On 03/09/2012 07:51 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 07:41:09 -0800 > Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> On 03/09/2012 07:21 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >>> The advantage that the eapi function has over a comment is that >>> it's not magic -- it's just normal bash syntax. So we've addressed >>> that issue at a small performance cost (we're really only sourcing >>> the ebuild up to 'exit'). >> >> Also consider the case where a user syncs after not having updated >> for a couple of months, and the tree contains some ebuilds with EAPIs >> that are not supported by the currently installed package manager. >> >> In this case, when resolving dependencies and filtering ebuilds based >> on whether or not their EAPI is supported, spawning bash once per >> ebuild is much more costly than the alternatives. > > isnt the whole point of the proposal to get eapi without sourcing ? > > so that we can use new bash features at local or global scope without > risking that people with an old bash get syntax errors trying to get > the eapi
Right. Michael has lost sight of the goal and is moving off on a tangent. -- Thanks, Zac
