Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 19:04, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:50:42 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 18:39, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:25:02 +0100 >>> Alessandro Selli wrote: >>> On 21/11/18 at 18:15, m712 wrote: >> Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? > I can't be sure if you are in jest. Of course I am not. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp asked: From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" To: dng@lists.dyne.org Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't that what $PATH is all about? And I answered with a case where the absolute placement of the sed executable does matter and cannot be circumvented with a PATH setting or the use of commands like which or command. What is not clear? >>> You got the context wrong, or as we say here in the UK, you got the >>> wrong end of the stick ;-) >>> >>> He asked 'Why would anybody hardcode the link', what has this to do >>> with a shebang ? >> >> A shebang is an often used construct that would be broken were not a >> link in place. >> >> Do you need a drawing to see why? >> >> >>> You are quite correct, you cannot replace a shebang with 'which', >>> but then, this was never the problem. >> >> Yes, it is. Because shebangs do require a link from /usr/bin >> to /bin were files moved from /bin to /usr/bin. >> >> >>> Did you read the debian bugreport ? >> >> Yes, I did. >> >> Now you, how would you have a #!/bin/Rscript script work without a >> filesystem-level link? >> >> > I repeat, the problem in the bugreport had nothing to do with a shebang, The bug report is about Rscript. Do you know what that is for? It's long being considered good practice on updates letting the system be changed in such a way as to let the old scripts work without modifications. That was a golden rule under Solaris for instance, which explains why they put in /bin and /usr/bin old, non POSIX compliant versions of shells, sed, awk and so forth, with the revised, improved, X/Open standard utilities installed in /usr/xpg4/bin/. Debian broke this golden Unix rule, putting the link on the filesystem from /usr/bin to /bin is the correct VUA remedy to the issue they introduced, because it shifts the responsibility in maintaining the system integrity on updated to the distribution development team, not on users. You're free to disagree of course, but please let me kow if and where are ever you going to take responsibility in maintaining a GNU/Linux distribution or a major package. Or maybe you're going to be a systemd developer, in which case it would be quite all right and actually pretty appropriate. -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 22/11/18 06:50, Alessandro Selli wrote: >> He asked 'Why would anybody hardcode the link', what has this to do with >> a shebang ? > > > A shebang is an often used construct that would be broken were not a > link in place. False: Using the shebang "#! /usr/bin/env will work provide the command is in a dir listed in the $PATH -- Daniel Reurich Centurion Computer Technology (2005) Ltd. 021 797 722 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:04:01PM +, Rowland Penny wrote: [cut] > > > > > Did you read the debian bugreport ? > > > > > > Yes, I did. > > > > Now you, how would you have a #!/bin/Rscript script work without a > > filesystem-level link? > > > > > > I repeat, the problem in the bugreport had nothing to do with a shebang, > it was a a hardcoded variable for sed, this worked until sed was moved > to another directory. The script probably would still have worked if, > instead of hardcoding the sed path, it had used the output from 'which' > or 'type' > It actually wouldn't have worked anyway, because `which` uses PATH, and in PATH /usr/bin normally comes before /bin. The package was built in a non-merged-usr env by the maintainer, and worked fine, then it failed when built in the buildd environment, which had been already migrated to merged-usr. The migration of the builders to merged-usr has apparently been reverted (see an email in debian-devel yesterday). My2Cents KatolaZ -- [ ~.,_ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - Devuan -- Freaknet Medialab ] [ "+. katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it ] [ @) http://kalos.mine.nu --- Devuan GNU + Linux User ] [ @@) http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia -- GPG: 0B5F062F ] [ (@@@) Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ ] signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:50:42 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 18:39, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:25:02 +0100 > > Alessandro Selli wrote: > > > >> On 21/11/18 at 18:15, m712 wrote: > Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? > >>> I can't be sure if you are in jest. > >> > >> Of course I am not. > >> > >> Dr. Nikolaus Klepp asked: > >> > >> > >> From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" > >> To: dng@lists.dyne.org > >> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 > >> Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> > >> > >> > >> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > >> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > >> > >> > >> > >>And I answered with a case where the absolute placement of the > >> sed executable does matter and cannot be circumvented with a PATH > >> setting or the use of commands like which or command. > >> > >> > >> What is not clear? > >> > >> > >> > > You got the context wrong, or as we say here in the UK, you got the > > wrong end of the stick ;-) > > > > He asked 'Why would anybody hardcode the link', what has this to do > > with a shebang ? > > > A shebang is an often used construct that would be broken were not a > link in place. > > Do you need a drawing to see why? > > > > You are quite correct, you cannot replace a shebang with 'which', > > but then, this was never the problem. > > > Yes, it is. Because shebangs do require a link from /usr/bin > to /bin were files moved from /bin to /usr/bin. > > > > Did you read the debian bugreport ? > > > Yes, I did. > > Now you, how would you have a #!/bin/Rscript script work without a > filesystem-level link? > > I repeat, the problem in the bugreport had nothing to do with a shebang, it was a a hardcoded variable for sed, this worked until sed was moved to another directory. The script probably would still have worked if, instead of hardcoding the sed path, it had used the output from 'which' or 'type' It seems I read the bugreport differently to the way you did, we are never going to agree here, you have your point of view, I have mine, so lets just leave it there ;-) Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 18:39, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:25:02 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 18:15, m712 wrote: Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? >>> I can't be sure if you are in jest. >> >> Of course I am not. >> >> Dr. Nikolaus Klepp asked: >> >> >> From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" >> To: dng@lists.dyne.org >> Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 >> Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> >> >> >> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't >> that what $PATH is all about? >> >> >> >>And I answered with a case where the absolute placement of the sed >> executable does matter and cannot be circumvented with a PATH setting >> or the use of commands like which or command. >> >> >> What is not clear? >> >> >> > You got the context wrong, or as we say here in the UK, you got the > wrong end of the stick ;-) > > He asked 'Why would anybody hardcode the link', what has this to do with > a shebang ? A shebang is an often used construct that would be broken were not a link in place. Do you need a drawing to see why? > You are quite correct, you cannot replace a shebang with 'which', but > then, this was never the problem. Yes, it is. Because shebangs do require a link from /usr/bin to /bin were files moved from /bin to /usr/bin. > Did you read the debian bugreport ? Yes, I did. Now you, how would you have a #!/bin/Rscript script work without a filesystem-level link? -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:29:59 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 18:21, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:05:44 +0100 > > Alessandro Selli wrote: > > > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:57, Rowland Penny wrote: > >>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 > >>> Alessandro Selli wrote: > >>> > On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 > > Alessandro Selli wrote: > > > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > >>> Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > >> [...] > >> > >> > I read the discussion at > https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html > and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version > 3.5.1-2. Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead > of /usr/bin we may have to patch both packages sed and > r-base. > > Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible > from /usr/bin instead of just /bin. > >>> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > >>> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > >> It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. > >> > > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the > > file actually exists. > > > > Rowland > > > Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: > > > #!/bin/sed > > , which is the norm, see: > > https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed > > , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. > >>> Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, > >> > >> Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? > > And which part of 'that isn't the problem' do you fail to grasp ? > > > You asked: > > > From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" > To: dng@lists.dyne.org > Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 > Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> > > > "Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't > that what $PATH is all about?" > > > I answered to this question. > > > > From the debian bug report: > > > I did not answer any question about Debian bug reports, I answered > to the afore-quoted question. > > The Debian bug report is related anyway, because (though you didn't > know it) R itself can and in fact is used as a scripting language. > 'R' itself is a bash script and it hard codes the path to sed in it, this is, IMO, a stupid idea and lead to the problem when sed was moved. Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 08:15:59PM +0300, m712 wrote: [cut] > >>> > >>> #!/bin/sed > >>> > >>> , which is the norm, see: > >>> > >>> https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed > >>> > >>> , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. > >> Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, > > > > > > Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? > This thread is about Debian breaking R. If you want to talk about she-bangs, > make your own. /usr/bin/env is also a thing that is pretty standard on Linux > distros. Actually, this part of the thread is mostly about nothing at all, since the bug revelead by the R package has been apparently solved (it was due to deboostrap defaulting to merged-user in their configs, and the change has been reverted). We could probably see a couple of concrete problems when (and if) Debian decides to default to merged-usr in the builders. But this will most probably not happen right now (if at all). HND KatolaZ -- [ ~.,_ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - Devuan -- Freaknet Medialab ] [ "+. katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it ] [ @) http://kalos.mine.nu --- Devuan GNU + Linux User ] [ @@) http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia -- GPG: 0B5F062F ] [ (@@@) Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ ] ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:25:02 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 18:15, m712 wrote: > >> Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? > > I can't be sure if you are in jest. > > > Of course I am not. > > Dr. Nikolaus Klepp asked: > > > From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" > To: dng@lists.dyne.org > Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 > Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> > > > Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't > that what $PATH is all about? > > > >And I answered with a case where the absolute placement of the sed > executable does matter and cannot be circumvented with a PATH setting > or the use of commands like which or command. > > > What is not clear? > > > You got the context wrong, or as we say here in the UK, you got the wrong end of the stick ;-) He asked 'Why would anybody hardcode the link', what has this to do with a shebang ? You are quite correct, you cannot replace a shebang with 'which', but then, this was never the problem. Did you read the debian bugreport ? Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 18:21, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:05:44 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:57, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 >>> Alessandro Selli wrote: >>> On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: >>> Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: >> [...] >> >> I read the discussion at https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin instead of just /bin. >>> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? >>> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? >> It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. >> > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the > file actually exists. > > Rowland > Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: #!/bin/sed , which is the norm, see: https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. >>> Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, >> >> Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? > And which part of 'that isn't the problem' do you fail to grasp ? You asked: From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" To: dng@lists.dyne.org Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> "Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't that what $PATH is all about?" I answered to this question. > From the debian bug report: I did not answer any question about Debian bug reports, I answered to the afore-quoted question. The Debian bug report is related anyway, because (though you didn't know it) R itself can and in fact is used as a scripting language. See here, for an example: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3128122/shebang-line-not-working-in-r-script -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 18:15, m712 wrote: >> Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? > I can't be sure if you are in jest. Of course I am not. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp asked: From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" To: dng@lists.dyne.org Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:22:00 +0100 Message-Id: <201811211722.00535.dr.kl...@gmx.at> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't that what $PATH is all about? And I answered with a case where the absolute placement of the sed executable does matter and cannot be circumvented with a PATH setting or the use of commands like which or command. What is not clear? -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 18:05:44 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 17:57, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 > > Alessandro Selli wrote: > > > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: > >>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 > >>> Alessandro Selli wrote: > >>> > On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > [...] > > > >> I read the discussion at > >> https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html > >> and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version > >> 3.5.1-2. Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead > >> of /usr/bin we may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. > >> > >> Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible > >> from /usr/bin instead of just /bin. > > Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > > Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. > > >>> No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the > >>> file actually exists. > >>> > >>> Rowland > >>> > >> Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: > >> > >> > >> #!/bin/sed > >> > >> , which is the norm, see: > >> > >> https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed > >> > >> , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. > > Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, > > > Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? And which part of 'that isn't the problem' do you fail to grasp ? From the debian bug report: The problem appears to be on line 122 of /usr/lib/R/bin/R and /usr/bin/R, where between r-base-core 3.5.1-1+b1 and 3.5.1-1+b2, SED=/bin/sed changed to SED=/usr/bin/sed The script sets the path to sed with a hard coded path instead of finding out where sed actually is. Either don't set the variable and use $PATH to find it, or use something to find sed, then use this to set the variable. Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On November 21, 2018 8:05:44 PM GMT+03:00, Alessandro Selli wrote: >On 21/11/18 at 17:57, Rowland Penny wrote: >> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 >> Alessandro Selli wrote: >> >>> On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: >> Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > [...] > > >>> I read the discussion at >>> >https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html >>> and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version >3.5.1-2. >>> Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin >we >>> may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. >>> >>> Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin >>> instead of just /bin. >> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? >> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the >file actually exists. Rowland >>> Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: >>> >>> >>> #!/bin/sed >>> >>> , which is the norm, see: >>> >>> https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed >>> >>> , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. >> Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, > > > Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? This thread is about Debian breaking R. If you want to talk about she-bangs, make your own. /usr/bin/env is also a thing that is pretty standard on Linux distros. > >> but in this case >> it is setting the path to sed as a variable, so, if the script >> '/usr/bin/R' used something like this: >> >> SED="$(which sed)" >> if [ -z "$SED" ]; then >> echo 'sed is not installed' >> exit 1 >> fi >> export SED >> >> instead of: >> SED=/bin/sed >> export SED > > > Try putting this in place of a sed shebang and see what happens to >your sed script. The discussion wasn't about a shell script before you interjected. > >> We wouldn't be having this conversation. > > >... if you were any knowledgeable about shell scripting. Are you trying to have some sort of pissing match? > >>> >>> Of course you know you can't use commands or shell constructs in >>> place of the shebang, you did shell_scripting-101, didn't you? >>> >> We are not talking about the shebang, you did know that, didn't you ? > > > Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? I can't be sure if you are in jest. m712 -- https://nextchan.org -- https://gitgud.io/blazechan/blazechan I am awake between 3AM-8PM UTC, HMU if the site's broken ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 17:57, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 >>> Alessandro Selli wrote: >>> On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: [...] >> I read the discussion at >> https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html >> and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. >> Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we >> may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. >> >> Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin >> instead of just /bin. > Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > Isn't that what $PATH is all about? It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. >>> No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the file >>> actually exists. >>> >>> Rowland >>> >> Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: >> >> >> #!/bin/sed >> >> , which is the norm, see: >> >> https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed >> >> , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. > Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, Which side of "sed script with a shebang" do you fail to grasp? > but in this case > it is setting the path to sed as a variable, so, if the script > '/usr/bin/R' used something like this: > > SED="$(which sed)" > if [ -z "$SED" ]; then > echo 'sed is not installed' > exit 1 > fi > export SED > > instead of: > SED=/bin/sed > export SED Try putting this in place of a sed shebang and see what happens to your sed script. > We wouldn't be having this conversation. ... if you were any knowledgeable about shell scripting. >> >> Of course you know you can't use commands or shell constructs in >> place of the shebang, you did shell_scripting-101, didn't you? >> > We are not talking about the shebang, you did know that, didn't you ? Of course we are, why don't you read before replying? -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:43:12 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 > > Alessandro Selli wrote: > > > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > >>> Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> > I read the discussion at > https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html > and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. > Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we > may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. > > Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin > instead of just /bin. > >>> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > >>> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > >> > >> It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. > >> > > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the file > > actually exists. > > > > Rowland > > > > Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: > > > #!/bin/sed > > , which is the norm, see: > > https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed > > , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. Well it would if you were trying to run sed directly, but in this case it is setting the path to sed as a variable, so, if the script '/usr/bin/R' used something like this: SED="$(which sed)" if [ -z "$SED" ]; then echo 'sed is not installed' exit 1 fi export SED instead of: SED=/bin/sed export SED We wouldn't be having this conversation. > > > Of course you know you can't use commands or shell constructs in > place of the shebang, you did shell_scripting-101, didn't you? > We are not talking about the shebang, you did know that, didn't you ? Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 17:37, Rowland Penny wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 > Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: >>> Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: >> >> [...] >> >> I read the discussion at https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin instead of just /bin. >>> Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? >>> Isn't that what $PATH is all about? >> >> It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. >> > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the file > actually exists. > > Rowland > Of course it is. If you have a file with a shebang like this: #!/bin/sed , which is the norm, see: https://github.com/uuner/sedtris/blob/master/sedtris.sed , then you'd be in trouble if sed moved in /usr/bin. Of course you know you can't use commands or shell constructs in place of the shebang, you did shell_scripting-101, didn't you? -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 17:28:40 +0100 Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > > > [...] > > > >> I read the discussion at > >> https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html > >> and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. > >> Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we > >> may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. > >> > >> Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin > >> instead of just /bin. > > Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? > > Isn't that what $PATH is all about? > > > It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. > No it isn't, ever heard of 'which' or 'type' or checking if the file actually exists. Rowland ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On 21/11/18 at 17:22, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: [...] >> I read the discussion at >> https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html >> and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. >> Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we may >> have to patch both packages sed and r-base. >> >> Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin instead >> of just /bin. > Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't that > what $PATH is all about? It's necessary to keep script shebangs from breaking. -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
Am Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 schrieb Hendrik Boom: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 05:19:03PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult > wrote: > > > > just for your amusement ... > > > > > > Forwarded Message > > Subject: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin > > Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:01:46 + (UTC) > > Resent-From: debian-de...@lists.debian.org > > Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:55:31 -0600 > > From: Dirk Eddelbuettel > > To: Debian Developers > > CC: Dirk Eddelbuettel > > > > > > > > tl;dr: We may be messing up /bin and /usr/bin on some platforms > > They have already started making busy-work for us. > > > > > > > Sorry for the alarming headline but #913982 was filed, indepedently > > corrobated and simultaneously discovered by upstream. > > > > GNU R has long been relying on sed, tar, bzip2, ... and many more base > > tools. No issues there. Generally looked for in /bin and found there. > > > > Starting with binary rebuild r-base_3.5.1-1+b2 however, /usr/bin/* path > > crept > > in while the binaries where still in the wrong place. It looked like a > > one-off so I uploaded 3.5.1-2 which built fine for me on amd64 ...but > > apparently is already borked again on i386. > > I read the discussion at > https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html > and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. > Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we may > have to patch both packages sed and r-base. > > Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin instead > of just /bin. Why would anybody hardcode the link to sed in the first place? Isn't that what $PATH is all about? Nik > > -- hendrik > ___ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng > -- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ... ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 05:19:03PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > just for your amusement ... > > > Forwarded Message > Subject: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin > Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:01:46 + (UTC) > Resent-From: debian-de...@lists.debian.org > Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:55:31 -0600 > From: Dirk Eddelbuettel > To: Debian Developers > CC: Dirk Eddelbuettel > > > > tl;dr: We may be messing up /bin and /usr/bin on some platforms They have already started making busy-work for us. > > > Sorry for the alarming headline but #913982 was filed, indepedently > corrobated and simultaneously discovered by upstream. > > GNU R has long been relying on sed, tar, bzip2, ... and many more base > tools. No issues there. Generally looked for in /bin and found there. > > Starting with binary rebuild r-base_3.5.1-1+b2 however, /usr/bin/* path > crept > in while the binaries where still in the wrong place. It looked like a > one-off so I uploaded 3.5.1-2 which built fine for me on amd64 ...but > apparently is already borked again on i386. I read the discussion at https://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg1642443.html and it looks as if they fixed the discrepancy at version 3.5.1-2. Which means if we want to keep sed in /bin instead of /usr/bin we may have to patch both packages sed and r-base. Or maybe add a symblic link to make sed accessible from /usr/bin instead of just /bin. -- hendrik ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
[DNG] yet another case of silly Lennartism :p [Fwd: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin]
just for your amusement ... Forwarded Message Subject: Our build system may be broken: /bin vs /usr/bin Resent-Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 15:01:46 + (UTC) Resent-From: debian-de...@lists.debian.org Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:55:31 -0600 From: Dirk Eddelbuettel To: Debian Developers CC: Dirk Eddelbuettel tl;dr: We may be messing up /bin and /usr/bin on some platforms Sorry for the alarming headline but #913982 was filed, indepedently corrobated and simultaneously discovered by upstream. GNU R has long been relying on sed, tar, bzip2, ... and many more base tools. No issues there. Generally looked for in /bin and found there. Starting with binary rebuild r-base_3.5.1-1+b2 however, /usr/bin/* path crept in while the binaries where still in the wrong place. It looked like a one-off so I uploaded 3.5.1-2 which built fine for me on amd64 ...but apparently is already borked again on i386. I am at bit of loss here. Any ideas? Please CC me on replies. I will keep a look at the list archive too. Cheers, Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
