Bug 86926 – Portage binaries could be functions

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

[Description Kaiting Chen 2005-03-27 20:02:16 UTC]

There's probably a reason it is the way it is, but I just wanted to point out that if there was a single file, or if it was part of ebuild.sh, that we could make most of the files in /usr/lib/portage/bin/ functions instead of their own file. Like dojar, newinitd, doman, etc. It would probably be cleaner.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:

[Comment 1 Kaiting Chen 2005-03-27 20:08:55 UTC]

Then we could just put the files that need be in /usr/bin or /usr/sbin, and not have ugly symlinks. And then we could put /usr/lib/portage/lib/sandbox.bashrc in /usr/share/data/portage/ or /etc/ instead, and put only the python modules in /usr/lib/portage. I just think that that would be a lot cleaner than what's going on here right now. I guess that it doesn't really matter though, because no ones pokes around there anyways.

[Comment 2 Brian Harring (RETIRED) 2005-03-28 17:28:20 UTC]

Intended, although the final target is putting it into the rsync tree, and loading it from there rather then bundling it into a portage release.

[Comment 3 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) 2007-01-11 14:48:09 UTC]

Reopening for consideration

[Comment 4 Zac Medico 2007-01-12 07:14:43 UTC]

Bug 138792 has an implementation but it's focused on automatic die support.

[Comment 5 dougztr 2012-07-07 03:44:28 UTC]

I believe that the current system should remain in effect because the functions are external, greatly simplifying and reducing the core code, and enabling easier distributed development for maintenance.

Presumably the functions might not be expected to change very often, if external to the core they can be shared by other programs which might enhance and extend Gentoo's functionality. If a binary is absolutely required then a new package could be created which would provide a compiled shared library, and it would need to be written from scratch in the desired language most likely.

I suggest that this bug be closed. It is extremely old and there has been no activity for many years.

[Comment 6 Zac Medico 2012-07-07 03:54:21 UTC]

(In reply to comment #5)
> I suggest that this bug be closed. It is extremely old and there has been no
> activity for many years.

Yeah, I don't see any need to change anything now. If anyone wants to submit a patch, then we can consider it. However, they should refer to the "Ebuild Specific Commands" section of app-doc/pms to check whether it specifies if a particular helper is supposed to be an external command in PATH. Also, any bugs involving changes to app-doc/pms should be assigned to [e-mail].