| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 17:02:10 -0400
|
| 5 |
Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote:
|
| 6 |
> >> Lets address POSIX compliance in the ebuilds first. Then we can |
| 7 |
> >> deal with the package managers. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Why? It's highly doubtful the package manglers could switch shells |
| 10 |
> > even if they wanted to, and even if every ebuild started using EAPI |
| 11 |
> > 5. It's wasted effort. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Source the ebuild using the system shell, check for WANT_SH. If it |
| 15 |
> does not exist, proceed. If it does, start over with a different |
| 16 |
> shell. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I do not see any technical problem. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Package managers don't "source the ebuild"... You should take a look at
|
| 21 |
the amount of horrible bash code the three PMs have, and see why it's
|
| 22 |
there.
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
- --
|
| 25 |
Ciaran McCreesh
|
| 26 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
| 27 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
iEYEARECAAYFAk/iPC8ACgkQ96zL6DUtXhH6rQCghGeOb2N8iOm9F5u7k9jJkn2s
|
| 30 |
hcwAoKLB4kSHq7KaVh9D7mllQnU3U78Z
|
| 31 |
=DLvZ
|
| 32 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives