5:46 p.m.
Hi there,
I have just done an experimental build of system/ without GNU Bison
available. The only package that uses Bison extensions to Yacc is
iproute2. There are three ways forward I can determine:
1) Move iproute2 to user/.
We still have `ifconfig` and `route` from net-tools in system/ for base
installs. This allows us to continue to move GNU out of system/.
2) Port iproute2 to real Yacc.
I am concerned that the upstream of iproute2 may not want this, though
there has never been any public discussion that I've found on this
topic. If they do not, then we would have to carry the patch for it.
I will note that iproute2 only uses Yacc/Bison in one file, so it would
not be a particularly large patch to carry, but it would still be a
non-zero effort for every version bump of iproute2.
3) Leave Bison in system/ for now.
This would seriously hamper Project De-GNU[1].
Best,
--arw
[1]: https://wiki.adelielinux.org/wiki/Project:De-GNU
--
A. Wilcox (awilfox)
Project Lead, Adélie Linux
https://www.adelielinux.org
6:23 p.m.
On Mar 07 04:46 PM, A. Wilcox wrote:
Hi there,
I have just done an experimental build of system/ without GNU Bison
available. The only package that uses Bison extensions to Yacc is
iproute2. There are three ways forward I can determine:
1) Move iproute2 to user/.
We still have `ifconfig` and `route` from net-tools in system/ for base
installs. This allows us to continue to move GNU out of system/.
I think this is the best course of action for now, and it was the first
thought that came to my mind - if we don't absolutely need iproute2 in
the base install / bootstrapping system, it shouldn't be in @system
anyway.
2) Port iproute2 to real Yacc.
I am concerned that the upstream of iproute2 may not want this, though
there has never been any public discussion that I've found on this
topic. If they do not, then we would have to carry the patch for it.
I will note that iproute2 only uses Yacc/Bison in one file, so it would
not be a particularly large patch to carry, but it would still be a
non-zero effort for every version bump of iproute2.
This option could be pursued at a later date if it is deemed necessary
to keep iproute2 in @system.
Max
6:55 p.m.
On 3/7/2019 3:23 PM, Max Rees wrote:
On Mar 07 04:46 PM, A. Wilcox wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have just done an experimental build of system/ without GNU Bison
> available. The only package that uses Bison extensions to Yacc is
> iproute2. There are three ways forward I can determine:
>
> 1) Move iproute2 to user/.
>
> We still have `ifconfig` and `route` from net-tools in system/ for base
> installs. This allows us to continue to move GNU out of system/.
I think this is the best course of action for now, and it was the first
thought that came to my mind - if we don't absolutely need iproute2 in
the base install / bootstrapping system, it shouldn't be in @system
anyway.
I would prefer that we have iproute2 in system/ over net-tools to be
honest. net-tools isn't really maintained any longer, and iproute2 was
meant to be the replacement. I personally prefer the iproute2 interface
over net-tools anyhow.
> 2) Port iproute2 to real Yacc.
>
> I am concerned that the upstream of iproute2 may not want this, though
> there has never been any public discussion that I've found on this
> topic. If they do not, then we would have to carry the patch for it.
>
> I will note that iproute2 only uses Yacc/Bison in one file, so it would
> not be a particularly large patch to carry, but it would still be a
> non-zero effort for every version bump of iproute2.
This option could be pursued at a later date if it is deemed necessary
to keep iproute2 in @system.
I'd be interested in looking into what it would take to carry out this
change.
--
Dan Theisen
795
days inactive
796
days old
adelie-devel@lists.adelielinux.org
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
A. Wilcox -
Dan Theisen -
Max Rees