On Wednesday 25 January 2006 09:54, Grobian wrote: > It appears that some people > don't agree with you on changing the assumptions made in the current > portage tree. I'm not going to ask for dropping the assumption, I'm just asking for making sure that the assumption is actually backed up with actual presence. The sed/gsed naming shouldn't be too hard to achieve and it's already common in non-GNU userlands. As we seen for gmake/gawk, it's also a common way to make sure for some scripts to use a GNU tool.
> Solution to this is making the GNU tool the default for portage known > under its non-g-prefixed name, such that the assumptions made in the > tree hold. This requires (ab)using /usr/lib/portage/bin .. last time you were against that, weren't you? > Maybe it's just the path of least resistance... The profit of having a > tree that works with any implementation of awk, sed, find, xargs, etc. > is perhaps too small for the actual work and sacrifices needed for it. About find, the problem is really minimum: with last release GNU find make simpler to deal with it as it has a stricter syntax. The rest, I never asked for people to rewrite all the awk and sed scripts to work with BSDish awk and sed, I'm just asking to make sure that the GNU versions are called, no matter what, by using gawk and gsed naming. I'm not even asking for them to be fixed for all ebuilds, but only for the ones that uses subshell not respecting aliases.... Not that difficult, is it? -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE
pgp7O2am6v67p.pgp
Description: PGP signature
