Hello How these folders like /usr/share/exherbo/banned_by_eapi/ would be populated? And how they will be cleared from "binaries" without reference from any repo?
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 executables? 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. Cheers On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:58 PM Bo Ørsted Andresen <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev >
_______________________________________________ Exherbo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.exherbo.org/mailman/listinfo/exherbo-dev
