Re: Mass issue: /usr/bin/env dependency

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux