Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:36:37AM +0100, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
I propose to phase out
#!/usr/bin/env python
in favour of
#!/usr/bin/python
in our python scripts.
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
Note that we already use the second form 182 times in non-test
scripts, while we use env 63 times.
The current problem that I'm solving is that osa-dispatcher, when
started via /usr/bin/env, will search directories for python, which
generates SELinux AVC denials like
type=AVC msg=audit(1231924839.798:5971): avc: denied { search } for
pid=15336 comm=python name=root dev=dm-0 ino=784129
scontext=root:system_r:osa_dispatcher_t:s0
tcontext=root:object_r:user_home_dir_t:s0 tclass=dir
Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not
a good example.
But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the
shebang line and be consistent about it?
--
Jan Pazdziora
Satellite Engineering, Red Hat
___
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
Devan Goodwin wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:13:20 +0100
Jan Pazdziora jpazdzi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:36:37AM +0100, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
I propose to phase out
#!/usr/bin/env python
in favour of
#!/usr/bin/python
in our python scripts.
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
Note that we already use the second form 182 times in non-test
scripts, while we use env 63 times.
The current problem that I'm solving is that osa-dispatcher, when
started via /usr/bin/env, will search directories for python, which
generates SELinux AVC denials like
type=AVC msg=audit(1231924839.798:5971): avc: denied { search }
for pid=15336 comm=python name=root dev=dm-0 ino=784129
scontext=root:system_r:osa_dispatcher_t:s0
tcontext=root:object_r:user_home_dir_t:s0 tclass=dir
Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not
a good example.
But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the
shebang line and be consistent about it?
+1. I'd go the other direction though and stick with /usr/bin/env
python, iirc that's considered best practice to accommodate people
with Python installed in a weird location or using multiple versions.
Devan
Agree with Devan on this. /usr/bin/env python is more farsighted for
users who have weird install locations. Else they i'll have to link
/usr/bin/python each time they have new version. /usr/bin/env is more
adaptable. I suggest changing the rest to this.
~ Prad
- --
Devan Goodwin dgood...@redhat.com
Software Engineer Spacewalk / RHN
Satellite Halifax, Canada
650.567.9039x79267 Coming back to Java after a few months off is like
a slap in the face.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAklt4UYACgkQAyHWaPV9my4/qACbBZ1YE/c9Vl0Xt4lxTR293Oth
cJgAnR3duyp7zEM02m64byk9vEfB6Uiq
=8N1T
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
___
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 08:57:38AM -0400, Devan Goodwin wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not a good example. But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the shebang line and be consistent about it? +1. I'd go the other direction though and stick with /usr/bin/env python, iirc that's considered best practice to accommodate people with Python installed in a weird location or using multiple versions. If you have Python in a weird location, you probably won't have osa-dispatcher .py files installed in its PYTHONHOME, will you? So, the first import which assumes that the python you run actually has all the prerequisites installed, will fail. Alternatively, mixing different pythons and libraries from different pythons might produce weird results because symbols referenced in one library might not be present in the library from that second python. We actually have (non-public) bugzilla about this very problem. I'd argue that we should stop pretending that /usr/bin/env python will work in the general case, any just put /usr/bin/python there. If someone needs to run it with different interpreter, they can always do python /the/path/to/the/script -- Jan Pazdziora Satellite Engineering, Red Hat ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
Devan Goodwin wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:13:20 +0100
Jan Pazdziora jpazdzi...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:36:37AM +0100, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
I propose to phase out
#!/usr/bin/env python
in favour of
#!/usr/bin/python
in our python scripts.
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
Note that we already use the second form 182 times in non-test
scripts, while we use env 63 times.
The current problem that I'm solving is that osa-dispatcher, when
started via /usr/bin/env, will search directories for python, which
generates SELinux AVC denials like
type=AVC msg=audit(1231924839.798:5971): avc: denied { search }
for pid=15336 comm=python name=root dev=dm-0 ino=784129
scontext=root:system_r:osa_dispatcher_t:s0
tcontext=root:object_r:user_home_dir_t:s0 tclass=dir
Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not
a good example.
But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the
shebang line and be consistent about it?
+1. I'd go the other direction though and stick with /usr/bin/env
python, iirc that's considered best practice to accommodate people
with Python installed in a weird location or using multiple versions.
Devan
I agree with Devan, and prefer the env usage.
___
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
Jan Pazdziora wrote: On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 08:57:38AM -0400, Devan Goodwin wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not a good example. But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the shebang line and be consistent about it? +1. I'd go the other direction though and stick with /usr/bin/env python, iirc that's considered best practice to accommodate people with Python installed in a weird location or using multiple versions. If you have Python in a weird location, you probably won't have osa-dispatcher .py files installed in its PYTHONHOME, will you? So, the first import which assumes that the python you run actually has all the prerequisites installed, will fail. Alternatively, mixing different pythons and libraries from different pythons might produce weird results because symbols referenced in one library might not be present in the library from that second python. We actually have (non-public) bugzilla about this very problem. I'd argue that we should stop pretending that /usr/bin/env python will work in the general case, any just put /usr/bin/python there. If someone needs to run it with different interpreter, they can always do python /the/path/to/the/script I would prefer the hard code path to the python binary for reasons stated by Jan above. Folks - other than preference normally - please give feedback based on this above information. Cliff -- Clifford Perry Manager, Satellite Engineering Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com/ +1 919 754 4403 RHCA / RHCE# 805007680128201 ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
Re: [Spacewalk-devel] #!/usr/bin/env python to #!/usr/bin/python
Clifford Perry wrote: Jan Pazdziora wrote: On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 08:57:38AM -0400, Devan Goodwin wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Actually, this AVC denial is about different problem. So it was not a good example. But nevertheless: shouldn't we decide for env or direct path in the shebang line and be consistent about it? +1. I'd go the other direction though and stick with /usr/bin/env python, iirc that's considered best practice to accommodate people with Python installed in a weird location or using multiple versions. If you have Python in a weird location, you probably won't have osa-dispatcher .py files installed in its PYTHONHOME, will you? So, the first import which assumes that the python you run actually has all the prerequisites installed, will fail. Alternatively, mixing different pythons and libraries from different pythons might produce weird results because symbols referenced in one library might not be present in the library from that second python. We actually have (non-public) bugzilla about this very problem. I'd argue that we should stop pretending that /usr/bin/env python will work in the general case, any just put /usr/bin/python there. If someone needs to run it with different interpreter, they can always do python /the/path/to/the/script I would prefer the hard code path to the python binary for reasons stated by Jan above. Folks - other than preference normally - please give feedback based on this above information. Cliff I'd suggest /usr/bin/python without the env. If the RPM doesn't work with the distribution-specific Python, things are quite busted, and folks shouldn't expect them to work. We do not package two python versions, and the modules won't be properly installed as required by the RPM. --Michael ___ Spacewalk-devel mailing list Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
