Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID...
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 23:23:02
Message-Id: 20051005232236.GE13519@nightcrawler
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID... by Ciaran McCreesh
1 On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:14:30AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
2 > On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:12 -0500 Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o>
3 > wrote:
4 > | Beyond that, there is the shebang issue which can be addresses via a
5 > | combination of automated scans/fixes, and fixing bugs as it's hit.
6 > | Hardcoded vars in scripts for the path to a binary are an issue also,
7 > | although again, scans can be done to at least check for it.
8 >
9 > This one's a far bigger issue than might be initially obvious. It would
10 > involve rewriting a whole load of autotools innards...
11 Clarify. My knowledge of autotool innards is that it relies on $PATH
12 for lookup of the tools it uses.
13
14 > | Leaves mangling the build process so that the build framework of the
15 > | package uses the prefix offset files, rather then / . For c/c++
16 > | source, usual trick from fink afaik involves a mangling of cflags
17 > | with -I tacked in. Kinda ugly, although I'd expect there is a better
18 > | route.
19 >
20 > Again, autoconf tinkering.
21 Statement above is from digging through generated configure script.
22 ~harring

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Questions about CVS locations and GID... Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o>