Re: [9fans] acme, rio workalike available in plan 9 ports

[Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>]

Bengt Kleberg wrote:

> Russ Cox wrote:
> ...deleted
>
>>
>> the problem isn't that i don't know what the structure should look like.
>> the problem is that i don't want to do it.  i find it annoying to have
>> to type things like /usr/local/plan9/FreeBSD/386/bin/acme,
>
>
> surely you would have set your $path to include 
> /usr/local/plan9/FreeBSD/386/bin ?


sure but i still type the paths a lot.

> > and further
>
>> it makes writing shell scripts impossible:
>>
>>    #!/usr/local/plan9/FreeBSD/386/bin/rc
>>
>> isn't very portable!  you'd have to have a shell script "rc" that ran
>> the binary rc and then use
>>
>>    #!/usr/local/plan9/rc/bin/rc
>>
>> or something like that.  it's just disgusting.
>
>
> is it correct to assume that this unportableness of rc scripts is the 
> reason for using /bin/sh all over the place? including in mk, which is 
> not entirely to my liking.


the reason mk uses sh is that it came before rc.
i'm not sure what to do here.  i'm not convinced
rc is quite stable enough to be used in mk.

> > i don't have many
>
>> environments
>> where different architectures share a tree like /usr/local, so i 
>> don't worry
>> much about it.  if we had union directories (or even athena's 
>> environment
>> variable symlinks) to hide the ugliness, i might feel differently.
>
>
> how about ignoring those that have the same home directory on several 
> architectures? this leaves ''only'' the simpler problem of installing 
> different files into $PLAN9/bin depending upon architecture.


how does this differ from what i am currently doing?

>> it's easy enough to change if you want to change it -- just edit
>> /usr/local/plan9/src/mkhdr and change BIN and LIB.
>
>
> since i am not entirely sure about what "it's" refers to, i will ask:
> do you mean that changing BIN and LIB will make it possible to install 
> into /usr/local/plan9/FreeBSD/386


yes.