Dne 29.3.2017 v 15:52 Tomasz Kloczko napsal(a): > On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:26 +0000, 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 > distribution resources as long as they are packaged into > binary packages they are ALL *already ported resources*. > You can provide 100% functional source code not depending on env and still > able to produce resources to install with fixed location of > <interpreter>. This is not the rocket science. > >> Moreover, if your PATH is compromised, you're most likely screwed. > Still .. if $PATH will be compromised removing using env decreases risk here > because removing using env attaches script to some fixed > <interpreter> path. > >> I understand, that env use in scripts makes is inconvenient in some cases, >> but I think that RPM build procedure and Fedora practices need to be fixed >> instead. > So instead decreasing generally entropy you are proposing increase it .. by > introduce kind of JFDI :) > >> The number of packages using env in scripts alone shows that it is a >> widespread and useful practice. > This is not about practice. > Generally using env comes from the time when when installing additional > version of the <interpreter> was only civilised way fulfilling > some needs without changing distribution resources. > Second typical past scenario was when distribution not been providing > <interpreter> and users have been installing it manually on top > of distribution in non arbitrary locations. > In other words always evn was more workaround than RightSolution(tm) and now > it is part of the legacy which can be removed cleanly. > > Using env it is more *legacy badge* which needs to be dropped best in source > code trees. > Producing patches and submitting them to source code maintainers will help > get rid those issues.
I can't imagine how you want to convince most of the Ruby developers, who are typically using Mac with RVM or rbenv, to accept patch to change shebang from "/usr/bin/env ruby" to "/usr/bin/ruby". I suppose the situation is similar for Python with virtualenv ... Actually if you searched packages for /usr/bin/env, I'd love to know the ration to packages with /usr/bin/ruby (in my case). And you can exclude the packages where the shebang is already modified from upstream. Vít _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
