Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Roy Marples <uberlord@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNU userland and binary package (WAS: RFC: sh versionator.eclass)
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:59:51
Message-Id: 1192085169.2451.6.camel@uberpc.marples.name
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNU userland and binary package (WAS: RFC: sh versionator.eclass) by Alec Warner
1 On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 20:03 -0700, Alec Warner wrote:
2 > > B. don't use GNU extensions in pkg_functions and have some way to export
3 > > them (extract pkg_* functions from environment.bz2). Those can then be
4 > > used by pre/post script in binary package manager.
5 >
6 > This is your best bet, but again mandates are ineffective. As you've
7 > no doubt noticed with quoting, people will do whatever works and the
8 > people who aim for odd targets like no GNU crap or sh compatability
9 > are going to have to do the code reviews and encourage that sort of
10 > thing. Just saying 'pre/post functions must be POSIX compatable' will
11 > get you nowhere. The point here is to sell your idea to other
12 > developers; if you can't sell it you may need to take it elsewhere.
13
14 This is what I'm preaching, but for the whole ebuild not just the
15 pre/post functions.
16
17 It's a tough crowd as everyone's a zealot with their own favourite "must
18 have" tools + the territorial crap which rears it's ugly head from time
19 to time.
20
21 Thanks
22
23 Roy
24
25 --
26 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list