Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: ryao@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: My wishlist for EAPI 5
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 05:55:07
Message-Id: 20120622075543.63591c10@pomiocik.lan
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: My wishlist for EAPI 5 by Richard Yao
On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:38:17 -0400
Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote:

> On 06/21/2012 04:29 AM, Duncan wrote: > > Richard Yao posted on Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:50:33 -0400 as excerpted: > > > >> On 06/20/2012 04:35 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400 Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> > >>> wrote: > > > >>>> POSIX Shell compliance > >>> > >>> So far as I know, every PM relies heavily upon bash anyway (and > >>> can't easily be made not to), so even if developers would accept > >>> having to rewrite all their eclasses, it still wouldn't remove > >>> the dep. > >>> > >> Lets address POSIX compliance in the ebuilds first. Then we can > >> deal with the package managers. > > > > Additionally, this is extremely unlikely because a number of > > developers insist on bash, to the extent that it would likely split > > gentoo in half if this were to be forced. It wouldn't pass > > council. It's unlikely to even /get/ to council. > > > > Openrc could move to POSIX shell because its primary dev at the > > time wanted it that way and it's only a single package. However, > > even then, doing it was controversial enough that said developer > > ended up leaving gentoo in-part over that, tho he did continue to > > develop openrc as a gentoo hosted project for quite some years. > > Now you're talking trying to do it for /every/ (well, almost every) > > package, thus touching every single gentoo dev. It's just not > > going to happen in even the medium term (say for argument APIs > > 5-7ish), let alone be something practical enough to implement, soon > > enough (even if everyone agreed on the general idea, they don't), > > to be anything like conceivable for EAPI5. > > > > So just let that one be. It's simply not worth tilting at that > > windmill. > > Would you (or someone else) elaborate on the specific features of bash > that people find attractive?
Local variables, reasonable behavior (like 'FOO=abc bar' where bar is macro), arrays, [[ ]] tests (which are obviously faster than calling external test program). One more use: printing useful die messages (in POSIX sh there's no way to do a backtrace). -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature