On Saturday, October 3, 2015, Clemens Lang <<a href="mailto:cal@macports.org">cal@macports.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
----- On 3 Oct, 2015, at 15:47, Bachsau <a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'web@bachsau.name')">web@bachsau.name</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Clemens Lang wrote on 03.10.2015 15:02:<br>
>> such as /bin/sh, /usr/bin/python, /usr/bin/make, /usr/bin/clang,<br>
>> etc.<br>
><br>
> All of which are also part of macports, so can't you just use this or<br>
> create shadowcopies yourself?<br>
<br>
Yes, we could provide copies of bash, python, make and clang ourselves<br>
and use them instead. So far, we have always relied on Apple's toolchain<br>
but you're right that we don't really have to.<br>
<br>
However, remember that it's not just 3-4 binaries we're talking about<br>
here. Lots and lots of smaller tools would also be needed, such as ar,<br>
as, arch, awk, base64, bc, bison, bzip2, chgrp, chown, cpio, curl, diff,<br>
du, grep, fmt, gzip, ...<br>
<br>
We're currently re-using some of those from /usr/bin to reduce the<br>
footprint of our build dependencies. MacPorts is already being<br>
criticized for using too much storage and "downloading the internet"<br>
before installing what you initially requested, and a change such as<br>
this would make things even worse.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div> <font size="2"><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Is there something clever that could be done with mounts or hard (directory) links here?</span></font></div><br><div> - Eric<span></span></div>