Need the 'dummies' fix to same problem:
cabal install (and other cabal commands) says that
ar is missing on a fresh nix install.
...
P.S. geekosaur says this is a ghc problem, not a cabal-install???
Need 'dummies' fix, nevertheless
,
Also using
cabal-install-0.14.0
Hi Eelco,
xsession: source /etc/profile at the beginning of the script
Hm, not sure if this is a good idea. Won't this prevent child shells
(e.g. konsole / xterm shells) from reloading /etc/profile (due to
$__ETC_PROFILE_DONE being set)?
yes, that is true.
I.e., you'll have to log
Hi,
On 09/11/12 18:38, Peter Simons wrote:
Is there a better way to approach that problem?
Yes, fix builders not to rely on /bin/sh (or at least not to assume
it's Bash).
we should link /bin/sh to Dash instead of Bash. That would catch any
implicit dependencies on non-POSIX shell
Hi Eelco,
we should link /bin/sh to Dash instead of Bash. That would catch any
implicit dependencies on non-POSIX shell features,
What's the point of that? Breaking zillions of existing scripts for
very little gain doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
now I am confused. In the very
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:57:24PM +0100, Peter Simons wrote:
Hi Eelco,
we should link /bin/sh to Dash instead of Bash. That would catch any
implicit dependencies on non-POSIX shell features,
What's the point of that? Breaking zillions of existing scripts for
very little gain
Hi Peter,
On 09/11/12 18:57, Peter Simons wrote:
we should link /bin/sh to Dash instead of Bash. That would catch any
implicit dependencies on non-POSIX shell features,
What's the point of that? Breaking zillions of existing scripts for
very little gain doesn't sound like a good
Hi Lluís,
I understood from niksnut that this change could be done in a branch,
without any merge to master until all (most?) works.
yes, absolutely. If we have consensus in the community that this kind of
change is desirable, then we should definitely do it in a branch.
I'm just confused
On 11/09/2012 01:06 PM, Eelco Dolstra wrote:
Hi Peter,
On 09/11/12 18:57, Peter Simons wrote:
we should link /bin/sh to Dash instead of Bash. That would catch any
implicit dependencies on non-POSIX shell features,
What's the point of that? Breaking zillions of existing scripts
Hi Eelco,
What I meant was that in Nixpkgs you shouldn't assume that /bin/sh is
Bash, because we obviously don't control that on non-NixOS systems.
right, I completely agree. I don't understand, however, why you seem to
insist that /bin/sh must be Bash on NixOS.
Why do you think that's so
Hi Shea,
Because (as this thread illustrates) that will break things, to almost
no gain.
if all scripts get fixed not to assume /bin/sh to be Bash, then there is
a significant gain to users of Nix on non-NixOS hosts. Doesn't that
count for something?
It's one thing to test locally with
How do you test packages locally with /bin/sh pointing to Dash on NixOS?
I had no idea that's possible.
# nix-build -A dash nixpkgs -o /bin/sh
I think this won't work as expected - /bin/sh/bin/dash is not what we
want.
___
nix-dev mailing list
11 matches
Mail list logo
