Finn Thain wrote:
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Nick Dimiduk wrote:
Grobian wrote:
I thought let's give it a shout, because maybe we should add it to the
base profile somehow and alias some more to have calls to find and
xarg (when not in a pipe) being directed to gfind and gxargs for
maximum compatibility. Maybe it's not worth it. Opinions?
How big is the installation of findutils? If it's not gigantic (I don't
expect it to be) then I think this is a good idea. Keeping things
within the portage environment as similar to "mainline" as possible will
only avoid hassles.
If by "mainline", you mean "Gentoo/Linux", the major dis-similarity
remaining is the name of the executable.
IMHO, the Alt project policy of mandatory "g" prefixes is misguided. If it
suits BSD, great, but AFAICT it limits portability to non Gentoo systems,
and it shouldn't be applied to all -alt projects.
My opinion actually was to just let it be ~ppc-macos, since there are no
known problems with the OS provided find and xargs. When we have a
prefix, we can just install the normal GNU find and xargs (without g
prefix) and have maximum compatibility with the other arches on that point.
The best Alt project policy is to always use portable shell script in the
tree. That is, avoid gnu extensions. That would help minimise the base
system if nothing else.
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/index.xml
If you can do an easy change to just make it work on non GNU versions --
something which Flameeyes has put a lot efforts in -- then I prefer to
simply do that. However, if problems or limitations (like OSX's sed for
instance) which are not easy to circumvent, then I'd opt for getting the
GNU version to avoid making it very complicated for everyone.
Question that remains is whether we can use the OS provided tools
without having to lie against portage, or limiting portage to 'upgrade'
(override) them with 'newer' (other?) versions when necessary.
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead
--
[email protected] mailing list
