| 1 |
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 11:44 AM Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 3:11 AM Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Recently Debian has started to transition away from the "which" command. |
| 6 |
> > [1] |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > which is a non-POSIX command which prints out the location of specified |
| 9 |
> > executables that are in your path. Unfortunately, there are several |
| 10 |
> > versions of the program around which are not compatible with each other. |
| 11 |
> > We package the GNU version as sys-apps/which, which is in the system set |
| 12 |
> > since 2004. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > Already in 2007, vapier asked developers to avoid which in ebuilds. [2] |
| 15 |
> > The replacement in most circumstances is "type -p" which is a bash |
| 16 |
> > builtin command. |
| 17 |
> > |
| 18 |
> > So, should we join the "which hunt", with the goal of removing |
| 19 |
> > sys-apps/which from the system set and from stage1? I think the first |
| 20 |
> > step would be to identify which packages use which, and add it as an |
| 21 |
> > explicit dependency. (Maybe the tinderbox could help there?) A bug for |
| 22 |
> > this [3] has already been filed by mgorny some time ago. |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > Unfortunately, the command pops up in unexpected places, e.g. it appears |
| 25 |
> > to be an (indirect) build-time dependency of systemd. [4] |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> "which" is a built-in command in bash, but not in dash. For most |
| 28 |
> users, /bin/sh points at bash and I don't expect to see much breakage |
| 29 |
> when /usr/bin/which is removed. The bug reports will come from people |
| 30 |
> who like pain and run their systems with /bin/sh pointed at dash. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Oops, turns out I tested with zsh, not bash. Disregard the above. |
Archives