Downsides? in reality, probably none as the likelihood of name clashes are slim. However, it would probably be against the general principals, because those are for all users on a system, while typically only a single user might have permission to access the system.
For that user the correct place would be in their own profile files. If they rely on sudo, then I don't think it sources those extra /etc/profile.d files. On Wednesday, 21 April 2021 at 1:41:50 am UTC+10 [email protected] wrote: > On Tuesday, April 20, 2021 at 8:20:35 AM UTC-7 Tom Keffer wrote: > >> I really don't like the idea of messing with profiles, especially system >> profiles. There is nothing standard about them. >> >> Understanding how paths work is fundamental to using command lines. We >> will just have to insist that users learn this minimum, especially if they >> are doing a setup.py install. If they can't handle that, they should do a >> package install. >> > > Yes, I understand both points there....but history is proving that they > can't handle that, and they are still doing setup installs, and they're > still being very frustrated by the result. > > This kind of thing is exactly what the profile.d hooks in the shell > startup sequence was designed for. Drop one file in there and 100% of > those problem reports goes away, as do so many hours of people struggling > os trivia they have no ability nor interest in learning. > > Is there any actual downside of appending to $PATH ? > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-development/7c200f34-3059-4878-be17-29fe82733211n%40googlegroups.com.
