From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] POSIX shell and "portable"
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 16:21:07 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200711051521.07840.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1194268910.6977.86.camel@sapc154>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2998 bytes --]
On Monday 05 November 2007, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 10:13 +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> > While I still have access to the u@g.o email, I'll respond here.
> >
> > On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 10:22 +0100, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 00:47 +0000, Roy Marples wrote:
> > >
> > > As it seems too few people really accept your suggestion, I feel it's
> > > time for me to chime in too, although I don't know what exactly
> > > POSIX-sh standard defines.
> > >
> > > Agreed, but (speaking for alt/prefix):
> > >
> > > Alt/prefix is designed to (mainly) work without superuser access on the
> > > target machine, which may also be Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and the like.
> > > /bin/sh on such a machine is not POSIX-shell, but old bourne-shell
> > > (unfortunately with bugs often).
> > > And it is _impossible_ to have sysadmins to get /bin/sh a POSIX-Shell
> > > nor to have that bugs fixed.
> > >
> > > But yes, on most machines there is /bin/ksh, which IMHO is POSIX
> > > compliant (maybe also with non-fixable bugs).
> > >
> > > Although I do not know yet for which _installed_ scripts it'd be really
> > > useful to have them non-bash in alt/prefix, I appreciate the
> > > discussion.
> > >
> > > To see benefits for alt/prefix too, it _might_ require that discussion
> > > going from requiring /bin/sh being POSIX-sh towards being
> > > bourne-shell...
> >
> > Actually you missed the mark completely.
> > Nothing in the tree itself specifies what shell to use - instead it's
> > the package manager. So the PM on Gentoo/Linux/FreeBSD *could*
> > be /bin/sh and on the systems where /bin/sh is not possible to change to
> > a POSIX compliant shell then it can still use /bin/bash or wherever it's
> > installed.
>
> So "have the installed scripts to not require bash" is another topic ?
yes, and generally that's a baked topic. if your script is /bin/sh, then it
must be POSIX compliant. if your script is /bin/bash, then you're encouraged
to convert it to POSIX /bin/sh. but this is because the *runtime*
environment is generally a lot more restricted than that of the *buildtime*
environment. runtime implies a lot leaner requirements (think binary-only
systems, embedded systems, production systems, etc...) than that of a
development system (which requires everything in order to compile).
> Ok then:
> Given that we want to have the tree "more generic unix-able":
> What is the benefit from having the tree being POSIX- but not
> bourne-shell compatible, so one still needs bash on Solaris/AIX/HP-UX ?
> Because I'd say those three are the biggest substitutes for "unix",
> while I'd call *BSD and Linux just "unix derivates" (although with
> enhancements)...
we want the installed environment to be portable, not the build environment.
i do not see any benefit from forcing the build environment to be pure POSIX
compliant and i see many many detrimental problems.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-05 20:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-02 13:44 [gentoo-dev] More general interface to use flags Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2007-11-02 14:04 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 14:27 ` Marijn Schouten (hkBst)
2007-11-02 14:52 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 14:59 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-11-02 15:30 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 15:38 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-11-02 15:48 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 15:58 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-11-02 16:10 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 16:30 ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2007-11-02 16:52 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-02 17:17 ` Bo Ørsted Andresen
2007-11-02 17:35 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-03 0:19 ` [gentoo-dev] POSIX shell and "portable" Fabian Groffen
2007-11-03 0:47 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-05 9:22 ` Michael Haubenwallner
2007-11-05 10:13 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-05 13:21 ` Michael Haubenwallner
2007-11-05 20:21 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2007-11-05 23:18 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-06 7:12 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2007-11-06 7:40 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-06 8:03 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2007-11-06 8:25 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-06 9:04 ` Michael Haubenwallner
2007-11-05 20:32 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-05 20:55 ` Fabian Groffen
2007-11-05 22:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-11-03 0:57 ` Natanael copa
2007-11-03 1:06 ` Roy Marples
2007-11-03 16:19 ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
2007-11-03 1:10 ` [gentoo-dev] " Roy Marples
[not found] ` <b41005390711022225i4f30bb01jbf5a040c60c4b088@mail.gmail.com>
2007-11-03 5:26 ` Fwd: [gentoo-dev] More general interface to use flags Alec Warner
2007-11-03 21:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2007-11-04 10:54 ` [gentoo-dev] " Steve Long
2007-11-04 21:54 ` Alec Warner
2007-11-06 11:50 ` Steve Long
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200711051521.07840.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox