Re: [gentoo-dev] initscripts in python

["merv" <merv@spidernet.com.cy>]

I can see your point.  But there would, I believe, be very deliberate 
measures taken to ensure that the use of python in initscrits, since this 
is how the discussion started, did not result in a kind of python lock-
down of Gentoo.

>From my own point of view, the underlying theme of the idea is the 
concept of a more "extensible" shell.  Sh would remain the default 
required language of the shell environment.  It is a poewrful and widely 
shared tool and remove it would be self-defeating.  But the optional 
inclusion of the Python-style shell syntax or dialect at build time, and 
later thru interactive activation/deactivation switches at the prompt and 
in scripts, would mean that python shell environment could be switched 
on and off at will, could be used in a mixed environment with sh, and of 
course could be unmerged and compiled out at any time.  That the 
portage tree should have been written in python is perhaps a sign of 
Gentoo's progressive streak, but yes, non-python portage is a real 
possibility as could multi-language, selectable portage in the future.

The issue is not really about using Python per se.  Python is already a 
large part of Gentoo and is, in many senses, relatively accessible to 
the wider community (I know that argument is all much of a 
muchness).  Maybe the extensible shell could evolve to provide 
support for other languages.  As an anchor in our debate, and as a 
reference, isn't tcsh an example of the spirit of an extensible shell?  
Here we have C-like syntax operating at the shell level messaging the 
kernel.  Performance benefits of the C language itself on one side, isn't 
this (in a more developed [meaning, dynamic rather than static] form) 
the kind ofthing we are talking about?

Would not the future look, in these circumstances, something like a 
world in which the gentooer, at build time, could select to have a shell 
(with default sh) augmented with one or more language-dialects 
(syntax libraries, say Perl, Python and Ruby, or even JS and 
PHP...what the heck?!) of his/her choice for interactive use in the shell 
environment?

On 17 Apr 2003 at 8:45, Sven Vermeulen wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 03:44:28PM -0700, Abhishek Amit wrote:
> > If you run gentoo python is a requirment that you can not avoid in any
> > way. Portage is completly python. So I don't really see how python could
> > be too heavy unless you mean specifically for running these scripts.
> 
> Portage is completely python, yes, but you cannot know what the future will
> hold. I've personally already been working on a Gentoo-without-Portage (well,
> if you can still call it Gentoo that is :) for fun.
> 
> Creating the initscripts in Python will force you to stick with Python as a
> primary dependency, even if the Gentoo developers someday would say "hey,
> perhaps we can make a Gentoo-project with a C-coded Portage".
> 
> Wkr,
> 	Sven Vermeulen
> 
> -- 
> 	Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.
> 


--
Merv Hammer
mailto: merv@spidernet.com.cy

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list