Re: Re: ebuilds in XML

I urge you to take a closer look at some of the ebuilds we have to deal 
with and you may understand better why i think we need a proper shell 
styled language.

Look at things like xfree, mozilla, etc.

Gerk

On Monday, June 30, 2003, at 1:56 PM, Benjamin Judas wrote:

> Well, I was thinking of XML in ebuilds as an expressive language which
> everybody should be able to understand by everyone - wether he is or 
> he isn't
> a developer. I know a lot of you think, that the classical ebuild 
> format is
> quite ok; but when I am thinking back of my first attempt to write an 
> ebuild
> for Mercury i think, there really is the need to develop a package 
> format
> which is easily to understand for everyone.
>
> There are a lot of "normal" Gentoo-Users out there who miss their 
> favorite app
> in portage-tree. But they can't write an ebuild because they don't 
> understand
> the format.
>
> Why translate it into a bash-script? - Well, for some packages there 
> might be
> the need to insert some regular bash-code into the ebuild-script. If 
> those
> ebuilds would be translated into a shell script, there would't bee the 
> need
> to write an extra interpreter for the scripts.