Re: [gentoo-dev] Discussion: alternative compatible utilities

[Dan Meltzer <parallelgrapefruit@gmail.com>]

Well it would be nice to have it all abstracted, wouldn't stablizing a
package get exponetially harder? Not only would each arch need to be
tested, each combination of packages on each arch would need to be
tested, if FEX openpam became usable on linux instead of just
linuxpam, each arch that stableized would now need to say works for
this arch for linuxpam, and works for this arch for openpam, which
would cause lots and lots of keywords mess.

Or am I misunderstanding your post?

On 6/16/05, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> 
> > Let me explain: on Gentoo/Linux systems, all the base utilities (make, tar,
> > sed, etc etc) are GNUish; on Gentoo/FreeBSD they are BSDish; on Gentoo/Darwin
> > I don't really know :P
> > This limits a bit the user because to use other kind of utilities it must use
> > aliases and he can't change, for example, the tar used by portage or by other
> > scripts.
> >
> 
> Surely it would be interesting for developer that want to make sure
> their code will build in other userspaces w/out switching os,
> and if that won't be so painful, would worth testing it.
> 
> Obviously having it now isn't really needed. Thinking about that when
> committing/updating ebuild would be good.
> 
> ( still I do hate bsd core utils implementations but that is just my
> opinion =) )
> 
> lu
> 
> --
> 
> Luca Barbato
> 
> Gentoo/linux Developer          Gentoo/PPC Operational Leader
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
>

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list