Sime makelike wrapper scripts support

[Eli Schwartz]

On 1/14/20 1:43 PM, Laurent Bercot wrote:
>>>  - we agree, that "make" will never go into busybox.
>>
>> Why not? It is useful, and has well-established POSIX
>> properties/documentation, there are several other implementations to
>> compare and test against, and it can be disabled by default in which
>> case it won't add a single byte to anyone's busybox.
> 
> I suggest adding the "c99" utility to busybox.
> It's useful, it has well-established POSIX properties and documentation,
> there are several other implementations to compare and test against, and
> it can be disabled by default in which case it won't add a single byte
> to anyone's busybox.
> 
> Surely it's worth at least considering? I'd expect the reason there's no
> C compiler applet is very simple: no one has contributed one.
If you thought that was humorous... I don't actually see any fundamental
problem with that? At least not based on your attempt to turn the
argument around. If you're going to humorously insult an idea, your
previous "bikeshed" voting applet did a decent job, but you've totally
missed the boat here due to not actually conveying any sort of message
about why it should be bad.

Although it might be challenging for completely different reasons, that
is, to implement e.g. utility libraries (think libtcc1.a,
libgcc.a/libgcc_s.so) or headers provided by the compiler/libc in a way
that preserves busybox's single-file distributable nature but without
baking in assumptions about having an existing gcc/glibc development
environment or somesuch.
This is not a general condemnation on implementing a busybox binary that
you've just arbitrarily decided "shall not be accepted" simply by fiat,
without provided rationale and without being the project maintainer who
actually has the right to arbitrarily decide things.

Creeping featuritis is indeed a problem, but that's why proposals get
carefully considered for their utility before being implemented. There
must be some reasonable yardstick by which to measure usefulness; being
in POSIX and used to bootstrap/compile most operating systems and a fair
amount of the userland software seems like a not-unreasonable criteria,
much like the inclusion of "cp" because lots of software uses it at runtime.

And after all, why include patch and diff applets, then reject make on
sheer principled outrage?

-- 
Eli Schwartz
Arch Linux Bug Wrangler and Trusted User

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1601 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/attachments/20200114/f3cbd8e7/attachment-0001.asc>