[Nix-dev] Re: [PATCH 1/2] t/scons

[Marc Weber]

Excerpts from Eelco Dolstra's message of Wed Dec 22 15:22:14 +0100 2010:
> That is, most of the tools provided by stdenv.  This way, we actually get *more*
> predictable behaviour than upstream, so it's at least in the spirit of the
> upstream behaviour of not using the caller's environment.  What do you think?
I've had the issue that gcc wasn't found. So it would have solved my issue. 
However you know that in nixpkgs you're likely to override gcc. If you
hardcode gcc it won't work as expected in all cases.
So you fix something and you add potential breakage.
So what could be done ? Should we introduce PATH_STANDARD_TOOLS (which
can't be defined) but which could be used instead? KISS (keeping things
stupid simple is most important). So I still vote for my patch. But I
have it applied anyway. So its up to you to judge.

The patch was very long on the mailinglist. That feedback was given that
late illustrates that the current workflow of submitting patches works
but is not perfect. Its also you (the cummunity) who has to decide
whether you want this kind of "commit -> revert" or "commit -> fix"
history more often than necessary.

Yours
Marc Weber