On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 14:40 +0100, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > FPC repeated discussed this and we decided to ban env, years ago.
>
> AFAIK it was was never made official though - it is still in draft:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Script_Interpreters_(draft)
As well my pointing on using env does
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 13:23 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
[..]
> And my point is the code doesn't need fixing. "Fixing" code to stop
> using std::auto_ptr usually means replacing it with std::unique_ptr,
> which will break that code if it's supposed to build with a C++98
> compiler.
As you perfect
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:26 +, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> I would say using env in the shebang line is useful. Particularly for
> portability. As a developer, I wouldn't like removing it from my programs.
Portability is not an issue at all here in this exact discussed case because
distributi
There are several issues with /usr/bin/env dependencies and all those issues
are related to scripts which in script preamble are using
"#!/usr/bin/env ":
- if some scrip is using env rpm package build procedure find requires scripts
are not able to recognize that script is
script. It switches
For some reason you email landed in my spam folder :)
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 10:15 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 19/03/17 03:33 +, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> > Started cleaning parted.spec and found method *much* more often used.
> >
> > [tkloczko@domek SPECS.fedora]$ grep CFLAGS * | grep --
On Wed, 2017-03-22 at 13:59 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
[..]
> This is a really nice, easy-to-understand presentation putting forward
> the goals of the initiative, the current state, and where we hope to
> have it for the upcoming Fedora 26 release and Fedora 27 later this
> year. If you package
