Hi Eelco, Hmm, I already whipped up a generic solution for long shebangs [1] and there's the start of a nix build command already. With that already done it seems likely to be easier to just write a nix shell command rather than porting nix-shell, why do you think it's preferable to do otherwise?
~Shea [1]: https://github.com/shlevy/long-shebang Eelco Dolstra <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Shea, > > On 07/29/2016 10:48 PM, Shea Levy wrote: > >> For the perl->c++ work, how should we handle nix-shell shebangs given >> that the command is now "nix shell"? Should the nix command itself >> contain shebang-checking logic, or should we have a separate nix-shell >> C++ program just for shebangs, or something else? > > Well, there is no "nix shell" command yet. Given that the "nix" command is > experimental at the moment, it's probably best to keep nix-shell a separate > program for now. > > -- > Eelco Dolstra | LogicBlox, Inc. | http://nixos.org/~eelco/ _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
