From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ifs1P-0001B3-6l for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:59:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with SMTP id l9B6nAFB006951; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:49:10 GMT Received: from mail.marples.name (rsm.demon.co.uk [80.177.111.50]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l9B6lNln004675 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:47:23 GMT Received: from [10.73.1.30] (uberpc.marples.name [10.73.1.30]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.marples.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29AD0190038 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:11:00 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GNU userland and binary package (WAS: RFC: sh versionator.eclass) From: Roy Marples To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <200710012259.40589.uberlord@gentoo.org> <4709071F.6010900@gentoo.org> <20071007221505.GJ2848@gentoo.org> <200710072151.03442.vapier@gentoo.org> <4709A35B.6070407@gentoo.org> <1191833415.31670.41.camel@nc.nor.wtbts.org> <1191855757.31670.75.camel@nc.nor.wtbts.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Gentoo Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:46:09 +0100 Message-Id: <1192085169.2451.6.camel@uberpc.marples.name> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 79ac2136-305d-4005-99b3-5900c8e946a9 X-Archives-Hash: fb5c27fd02dddedd0cd7ca97c7b1934e On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 20:03 -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > > B. don't use GNU extensions in pkg_functions and have some way to export > > them (extract pkg_* functions from environment.bz2). Those can then be > > used by pre/post script in binary package manager. > > This is your best bet, but again mandates are ineffective. As you've > no doubt noticed with quoting, people will do whatever works and the > people who aim for odd targets like no GNU crap or sh compatability > are going to have to do the code reviews and encourage that sort of > thing. Just saying 'pre/post functions must be POSIX compatable' will > get you nowhere. The point here is to sell your idea to other > developers; if you can't sell it you may need to take it elsewhere. This is what I'm preaching, but for the whole ebuild not just the pre/post functions. It's a tough crowd as everyone's a zealot with their own favourite "must have" tools + the territorial crap which rears it's ugly head from time to time. Thanks Roy -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list