| 1 |
On Oct 5, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:40:46 -0500 Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | > It does in some places, it doesn't in others. It especially |
| 6 |
> doesn't |
| 7 |
> | > for things that aren't normally found via PATH. It's a hell of a |
| 8 |
> | > mess. |
| 9 |
> | |
| 10 |
> | Examples? |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Of stuff in PATH? /bin/sh is assumed throughout to be a Bourne |
| 13 |
> compatible shell (and SHELL and CONFIG_SHELL aren't universally |
| 14 |
> honoured). uname, hostname and sed are called with hard paths (with |
| 15 |
> various fallbacks) in several early on stages. Of stuff not in path? |
| 16 |
> There's no standard and widely used way of digging up where libexec |
| 17 |
> tools are. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Its not like this is unchartered territory... off the top o' me head |
| 20 |
pkgsrc, DarwinPorts, openpkg, fink, written word, autopackage, MINE, |
| 21 |
and SamHain have all tackled this in one way or the other. All of |
| 22 |
these projects have their faults (duh? but then again so does portage |
| 23 |
and the ebuild tree) but a few of them have been quite successful |
| 24 |
despite their varying points of inherent silliness. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
--Kito |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives