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 1IeewP-0004kl-2I for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 22:49:41 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with SMTP id l97MdKvU008597; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 22:39:20 GMT Received: from shadow.wildlava.net (shadow.wildlava.net [67.40.138.81]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l97MbMKL006121 for ; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 22:37:23 GMT Received: from [67.40.138.82] (crater.wildlava.net [67.40.138.82]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shadow.wildlava.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E386E8F459 for ; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 16:37:21 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <47095FA1.7010305@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:37:21 -0600 From: Joe Peterson User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071003) 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: sh versionator.eclass References: <200710012259.40589.uberlord@gentoo.org> <200710020610.35301.vapier@gentoo.org> <4702CDFF.6010607@gentoo.org> <200710070103.57468.vapier@gentoo.org> <4709071F.6010900@gentoo.org> <20071007221505.GJ2848@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20071007221505.GJ2848@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 567e2d2c-6d32-4fbe-a5de-4a89dee1525a X-Archives-Hash: 420edc5b8e21fc69ca6e534c61716cd9 Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 07-10-2007 10:19:43 -0600, Joe Peterson wrote: >> So there are a couple of options, as I see it: >> >> 1) Limit tool options to those that are common to all tool variants >> 2) Port a standard (i.e. GNU) set of tools to all platforms >> 3) Force all gentoo ports to use GNU userland >> >> I think we'd all agree that #3 is too restrictive. For example, g/fbsd >> uses BSD's userland (like vanilla FreeBSD does), and making it GNU would >> be a pretty major change. > > No, it is not. The problem IMHO is in the "user" userland and the > "portage" userland are being seen as one. I think it would be very easy > to install all GNU equivalents of tools on BSD in some separate dir, put > it in portage's DEFAULT_PATH before /bin and /usr/bin and all would work > perfectly well from the ebuild/eclass perspective. Yep, that's option #2, and I think that could work - a subset of commands in their GNU variants used by portage. It means formalizing the official set of tools allowed for use in ebuilds (I'm not sure if the dev guide really codifies this or not, even though it gives a list of such tools). What I meant above is that #3, which would be changing all of userland itself to GNU, would be major and undesirable. Having the option of a complete GNU userland would be an interesting option/project, but it's a good thing to have the flexibility to have any userland desired, as long as portage has a way of being consistent (i.e. via something like #2). -Joe -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list