-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 23/08/10 18:26, Olivier Crête wrote: > > Other distributions are going one step further and are going for > shell-free boot. We should follow that lead. >
Why? Presumably they're doing it by writing programs that do their own parsing and executing, which means they'll need a maintainer just for that program and they'll have to go through a few iterations to get the initial bugs out, and then people will have to learn how to use the different-yet-again language that goes with it. Why not rely on a prebuilt parser that devs already have to know to look after ebuilds? I'm happy to accept that there might be some very good reasons (respawning a shell for each script is time consuming/expensive?), but without describing what those reasons are, it's not a direction we should just be following blindly... Mike 5:) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkxyuXMACgkQu7rWomwgFXrqSwCgjANV5zpo/uYrML+q1mCXHVgI ghcAn2oRJMUl4V+L4UHhEABYUs58e9c5 =jen/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
