On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 02:33:20PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > On 10/20/14 13:36, Rainer Duffner wrote: > > > >> Am 20.10.2014 um 10:19 schrieb David Chisnall <thera...@freebsd.org>: > >> > >> > >> I presume that most of the relevant differences are for users / developers > >> and not sysadmins? It's worth noting that GNU coreutils, tar, bash, and a > >> load of other things are in the ports repository. I wonder if it's worth > >> having a gnu-userland metaport, perhaps with something like the Solaris > >> approach of sticking them all in a different tree so that you can just add > >> that to the start of your PATH and have all of the GNU tools work by > >> default. > >> > > > > > > They use chef. > > The chef omnibus installer assumes there is a /bin/bash. Even the FreeBSD > > version of it. Well, it least it did the last time I looked. Maybe this got > > fixed in the meantime. > > Which means that to „bootstrap“ a node, you’ve first got to install pkg on > > it, install bash, symlink it to /bin/bash and then bootstrap the node. > > Which kind of runs against the concept of doing everything via chef. > > > > > > > > Hi from sysutils/ansible maintainer! > > The ansible port REINPLACE_CMDs away hardcoded paths at build time. This > way managing FreeBSD "just works". Maybe chef can benefit from the same > approach? > USES=shebangfix is there exactly for that.
Description: PGP signature