Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 20:40:06
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 by Richard Yao
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:25:30 -0400
Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote:
> Multilib (and/or multiarch) support > The current binaries cause a great deal of pain, particularly > when a user does not want to upgrade something. I had this problem > with WINE and glibc because I wanted to avoid the reverse memcpy() > fiasco on my systems. This situation would have been avoided entirely > if the package manager supported multilib.
This one's unlikely to happen unless someone's prepared to put in the work.
> POSIX Shell compliance > There has been a great deal of work done to give the user > full control of what is on his system and there is more that we can > do there. In particular, I think a lean Gentoo Linux system should be > able to use busybox sh and nothing else. That requires POSIX shell > compliance. OpenRC init scripts support this and the configure > scripts support this. The few exceptions are bugs that are addressed > by the Gentoo BSD developers. As such, I think we should make EAPI=5 > use POSIX shell by default. If an ebuild requires bash, we can allow > the ebuild to declare that (e.g. WANT_SH=bash), but that should be > the exception and not the rule.
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. -- Ciaran McCreesh


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 Richard Yao <ryao@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 Justin <jlec@g.o>