Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 09:42:50
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] My wishlist for EAPI 5 by Alec Warner
On 21 June 2012 05:33, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote: >> Here is my wishlist for EAPI 5:
>> 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. >> > > Our ebuilds are written in bash. [...] Screw > trying to get the PM to stop using bash; developers are not interested > in writing ebuilds in posix shell; bar none. > > Why would I as an ebuild author waste a bunch of time writing my > ebuild in posix compatible sh when I can use bash (and if I had a > better language than bash to write ebuilds in; I'd use that too.) You > are free to write your ebuilds in posix sh; good luck to you.
Ebuilds are written in bash. And the convenience of using bash far outweighs any benefits of using posix sh instead. One needs to make a very strong case to convince enough developers to change this... -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead