Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: New build types

["Rémi Cardona" <remi@gentoo.org>]

Steve Long a écrit :
> First and foremost to give an environment wherein people can write their
> installation scripts using the language they are most comfortable with.

If bash is not "easy" or straightforward enough for what you are trying 
to achieve, then I'd say the package is broken (ie, hand-made configure 
script, odd makefiles and whatnot). Better fix the package rather than 
rewriting ebuilds, make the world a better place.

> Secondly efficiency; in the case of a pbuild it could be run from within the
> PM; for something like a jbuild it would use the native tools and existing
> libraries like ANT. For hbuild it would tie into Cabal. While these may be
> used already, we go from PM -> BASH -> LangX. I'm just saying give the
> _option_ to leave out the BASH bit when you have mature tools in langX.

Care to back that up with any sort of figure or number? Is bash really 
the bottleneck? For 90% of the tree's ebuilds, I would _gcc_ is the 
bottleneck. Then I'd bet a big lump on libtool. Not portage, not bash.

But then again, I don't have any numbers to back that up either...

Honestly, maybe it could be a fun project, but I'm hardly convinced it 
would bring any sort of real advantage to the tree. In fact, having 
ebuilds in many languages would probably wreak havoc more than anything 
else.

My 2¢

Cheers,

Rémi
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list