On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:54:16PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Dave Reisner <d...@falconindy.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 08:54:28PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Dave Reisner <d...@falconindy.com> wrote:
> >> > This allows a user to provide their own binaries and override anything
> >> > that might be provided by busybox.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Dave Reisner <dreis...@archlinux.org>
> >> > ---
> >> > init | 2 +-
> >> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/init b/init
> >> > index ff4917a..e8f70a1 100644
> >> > --- a/init
> >> > +++ b/init
> >> > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
> >> > #!/bin/busybox ash
> >> > # Install busybox's applets as symlinks
> >> > -PATH=/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin
> >> > +PATH=/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin
> >> This is totally nitpicking, but we have this order by default in
> >> /etc/profile:
> >> PATH="/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/sbin:/sbin"
> >>
> >> Shouldn't we try to be consistent? Or at least figure out what normal is?
> >
> > Maybe it's another case of not being clear enough in the commit msg.
> > We're sort of peeing all over /usr/bin on the busybox --install, so we
> > need to be able to let the user have some control. We do that by letting
> > them override binaries in /usr/local/bin and putting this bin above the
> > rest. An extremely rare use case, but a use case none the less. I could,
> > also, be talked out of this patch along with the busybox on build rather
> > than run if it seems insane.
> I think you misinterpreted me. Note the order difference in yours vs.
> what I pasted from the stock Arch /etc/profile. Of course /local/ has
> to come first, but I was simply pointing out the "all /bin/ first" vs
> "all /local/ first" and other odd ordering choices.
>
Yep, I see it now. This is all somewhat suspect now anyways, and I
probably can throw this out, as it was "needed" for the patchwork that
installs busybox in the build, not the boot.
> > mkinitcpio is sort of longer overdue for some documentation regarding
> > the rules and regulations of hook writing. Merging this would sort of
> > reinforce that point.
> >
> >>
> >> Of course, from a CentOS box...
> >> $ echo $PATH
> >> /usr/sbin:/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin:/home/dan/bin
> >>
> >> -Dan
> >
> > Yeah, CentOS and RHEL both leave the /sbin's out of non root profiles.
> > Not a concern here, for obvious reasons.
> Also not what I meant to point out- here, /sbin/ takes preference over
> /bin/, always, including local. So another totally different take.
Also, I apparently can't read properly at 11pm. At least what I said
about RHEL is true, but it clearly has no bearing here...
> And for some more orderings...
> $ pacman -Qlq initscripts | xargs grep PATH=
> /etc/rc.d/functions:export
> PATH="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin"
> /sbin/rc.d: ENV=("PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin"
>
Yay!!! We probably had a reason for this, but I believe ordering the
/usr/local bins first has caused us pain with a user at least once.
d
