[Exherbo-dev] [RFC] Unprefixed executables.

Nikolay Orlyuk virkony at gmail.com
Wed Apr 6 05:32:56 UTC 2016


How these folders like /usr/share/exherbo/banned_by_eapi/ would be
And how they will be cleared from "binaries" without reference from any

Take into account that we have next scenario of managing Paludis repo:

   - To add new repo I can write repo conf file and during next cave sync
   it will be fetched to a proper place (usually /var/db/paludis/repositories).
   - To remove some repo I either re-name .conf file or just remove it and
   Paludis do not take it into account anymore. Optionally I can delete repo
   folder and its cache since they are unused.

How adding/removing of repos will co-operate with adding/removing banned
I don't want to have folder like /usr/share or /usr/libexec be populated
with unmanaged files.
And don't want to cleanup banned executables left after installing some
broken package from broken repo.

I see next directions:

   1. Provide banned executables right in .exlib and .exheres-0.
   2. Provide different sets of them as usual packages which is being pull
   in as a build dependencies.
   3. Make list of banned executables be part of repo metadata.

As I can see we actively discussing approach #1.
But if we want to stick to .exlib/.exheres-0 approach then these folders of
injected executables shouldn't be part of installed system, I think. They
might be created somewhere under WORKBASE.


On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:58 PM Bo Ørsted Andresen <zlin at exherbo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 03:47:47PM +0100, Wouter van Kesteren wrote:
> [...]> If you people don't want it in /etc (which seems to be the general
> > vibe) how about like /usr/share/exherbo/banned_by_package_manager/?
> >
> > (Quick though that popped in: then having /usr/share/exherbo/ maybe we
> > can also make eclectic's alternatives system use
> > /usr/share/exherbo/alternatives/? At least i get the feeling that the
> > same arguments that go against /etc for this apply to the alternatives
> > stuff in /etc too. We shouldn't overly focus on this but if we can
> > potentially get a path for both that'd be a nice bonus?)
> >
> >
> > >> 2. what will the implementation of the tiny ban scripts be?
> > >
> > > The implementation you're using in Gerrit (banned_by_package_manager)
> > > seems fine to me.
> > >
> > >> 3. do we want some helper like dobanned and/or env like BANNEDDIR
> > >> given by paludis and/or exlib?
> > >
> > > I question the usefulness of a dedicated helper for it, but having a
> > > BANNEDDIR seems like a good idea. The helper just seems a little weird
> > > to me since it could just as easily be done with a `herebin
> > > ${BANNEDDIR}/gcc` invocation.
> Adding to the bikeshedding, how about EXBANNEDDIR for the variable name and
> /usr/share/exherbo/banned_by_eapi/ for the PATH ?
> --
> Bo Ørsted Andresen
> _______________________________________________
> Exherbo-dev mailing list
> Exherbo-dev at lists.exherbo.org
> http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.exherbo.org/pipermail/exherbo-dev/attachments/20160406/1efe43c5/attachment.html>

More information about the Exherbo-dev mailing list