On 10/18/05, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Carl Lowenstein wrote:
>
> >>>Couple of comments:
> >>
> >>>Shouldn't your script use fully qualified paths for commands it
> >>>invokes, or else set $PATH to fit your environment?
> >>
> >>A fully qualified PATH or a specifically set path makes the script
> >>completely useless for a different user, a different Linux or a
> >>different OS.
> >>
> >>Why in the world would you want to completely prevent the use of this
> >>script in a different environment?
> >
> >
> > I think this is analgous to the use of a hardware RS232 null modem
> > box rather than making up a special cable to hide the connections. I
> > would rather have the search path dependencies written out where I can
> > see them than have them hidden in some user's environment.
>
> So, you'd rather that your filesystem was a mess of brittle symbolic
> links instead? I'm exaggerating, but only slightly.
>
> At one company, we had *hordes* of scripts that did what you said and
> hard encoded the paths. We had entire directories which had been around
> for 5 years simply to support the links to enable those scripts.
> Eventually, I got fed up with debugging this network of links on a
> semi-weekly basis for my engineering team.
Not sure whether those brittle symbolic links were made of straw, to
support the straw-man argument.
carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
