[gentoo-osx] Re: sys-apps/findutils (GNU)

[Finn Thain]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Nick Dimiduk wrote:

> Grobian wrote:
> > I thought let's give it a shout, because maybe we should add it to the
> > base profile somehow and alias some more to have calls to find and
> > xarg (when not in a pipe) being directed to gfind and gxargs for
> > maximum compatibility. Maybe it's not worth it.  Opinions?
>
> How big is the installation of findutils?  If it's not gigantic (I don't
> expect it to be) then I think this is a good idea.  Keeping things
> within the portage environment as similar to "mainline" as possible will
> only avoid hassles.

If by "mainline", you mean "Gentoo/Linux", the major dis-similarity 
remaining is the name of the executable.

IMHO, the Alt project policy of mandatory "g" prefixes is misguided. If it 
suits BSD, great, but AFAICT it limits portability to non Gentoo systems, 
and it shouldn't be applied to all -alt projects.
 
The majority of potential small prefix installations need that 
portability. I don't know about you, but under limited quota, as an 
unprivileged user, I don't want to have to do a large "emerge system" in 
my work/college/uni/client's home directory).

   http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/maintnotes.xml

So, the best policy is to follow the upstream convention. So, if Apple 
calls gmake "make", then Gentoo/OS X should do likewise. The idea being 
that this works on OS X (in a prefix), Gentoo/Darwin, Gentoo/OS X, 
OpenDarwin (in a prefix) etc -- basically any CHOST = *-*-darwin* system.

> This, however does not encourage portage itself to become more
> cross-platform, conforming the new hosts to portage.
>
> Other thoughts?

The best Alt project policy is to always use portable shell script in the 
tree. That is, avoid gnu extensions. That would help minimise the base 
system if nothing else.

   http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/index.xml

-f


-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list