[Exherbo-dev] [RFC] Unprefixed executables.

Wouter van Kesteren woutershep at gmail.com
Fri Mar 25 14:47:47 UTC 2016


On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Kylie McClain <somasissounds at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Wouter van Kesteren
> <woutershep at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1. what directory are we picking?
>
> In the Gerrit changes, I saw you were using /etc/env.d for storing the
> banned executables, which I think is a bad idea; things that are put
> in /etc tend to imply a level of user-customizability. Sure, that
> can't really be said for everything within /etc, but I think it's a
> reasonable standard to give to things in /etc. My point, is that I
> think it should be put in some other directory which is a little less
> visible to users.
> since i
> My preference would probably be something close to the rest of the
> utilities we use in exheres-0, in /usr/host/libexec/paludis, but I
> have a feeling that wouldn't fly with Ciaran.

I personally don't want 'paludis' nor 'exheres-0' mentioned in the
path to avoid coupling them together. Remember this is a path we cant
easily change once we settle on it. Say if paludis will shuffle its
utilities infrastructure around we cant really do the same for this
since its already on disk and potentially in premade pbins all over
the place. Saying 'paludis moved internal things, now you have to
recompile all packages using the banning system' is something i
desperately want to avoid. Seeing as we cant guarantee to stay close
to it its best to not go near it at all.
Also it's a bit annoying having target dependent stuff in the path,
it'd mean what we put in the config wouldn't be equal to BANNEDDIR
anymore and we need some @TARGET@ then or something in the config and
make paludis do the substition. I mean if everyone demands it we
could, but as a result i think i prefer to keep it in architecture
independent directories if at all possible unless someone gives an
example of executables that we need to ban on one arch, but not in
another arch.

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.

Too bad herebin doesn't take a path argument but instead takes a name
and goes into ${TEMP}/${1} before going to ${DESTTREE}/bin/${1}
through dobin ${TEMP}/${1}. ;)



More information about the Exherbo-dev mailing list