Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Gentoo Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/)
-   -   RFC: new feature to disable merging into stray locations (http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-development/661183-rfc-new-feature-disable-merging-into-stray-locations.html)

Michał Górny 04-30-2012 06:57 AM

RFC: new feature to disable merging into stray locations
 
Hello,

Since lately Gentoo devs force you to replace collision-protect with
protect-owned [1] and sometimes packages just spit out files randomly
on the filesystem due to random errors, I thought it may be a good idea
to provide a new feature limiting the locations where packages can
install.

In order to do that, we should first compose a complete include/exclude
list where packages can install. I'd suggest the following:

+ /bin
+ /boot (but maybe just subdirectories so packages can't overwrite
kernels?)
[potentially + /dev? but that's useful only when tmpfs isn't mounted]
+ /etc
+ /lib, /lib32, /lib64
+ /opt
+ /sbin
[potentially + /service for ugly daemontools]
+ /usr
+ /var
- /usr/local
- /usr/portage

What are your thoughts on this?

[1]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410691#c4

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Ulrich Mueller 04-30-2012 08:12 AM

RFC: new feature to disable merging into stray locations
 
>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> Since lately Gentoo devs force you to replace collision-protect with
> protect-owned [1] and sometimes packages just spit out files randomly
> on the filesystem due to random errors, I thought it may be a good idea
> to provide a new feature limiting the locations where packages can
> install.

If the eclass doesn't work with FEATURES="collision-protect" then it
needs to be fixed.

Ulrich

> [1]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410691#c4

Krzysztof Pawlik 04-30-2012 08:23 AM

RFC: new feature to disable merging into stray locations
 
On 30/04/12 10:12, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>> Since lately Gentoo devs force you to replace collision-protect with
>> protect-owned [1] and sometimes packages just spit out files randomly
>> on the filesystem due to random errors, I thought it may be a good idea
>> to provide a new feature limiting the locations where packages can
>> install.
>
> If the eclass doesn't work with FEATURES="collision-protect" then it
> needs to be fixed.

Long story short: older eclass compiled Python byte code in live file system,
new one does it in src_install so .pyo/.pyc gets properly recorded, so the
package *has to overwrite* files that are not owned by anyone (no package owns
them). I've talked to Zac and:

>>>
There's not much else you can do. However, FEATURES="protect-owned" is
enabled by default, and it will work fine if the .pyo and .pyc files are
not owned by anything. I don't know why people use
FEATURES="collision-protect", but at least you can tell them that
they'll still have a reasonable level of protection from
FEATURES="protect-owned" (it protect against file collisions between
packages).
<<<

If you want to help feel free to suggest *how* to fix it, patches are especially
welcomed :)

--
Krzysztof Pawlik <nelchael at gentoo.org> key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...

Krzysztof Pawlik 04-30-2012 08:24 AM

RFC: new feature to disable merging into stray locations
 
On 30/04/12 08:57, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since lately Gentoo devs force you to replace collision-protect with
> protect-owned [1] and sometimes packages just spit out files randomly
> on the filesystem due to random errors, I thought it may be a good idea
> to provide a new feature limiting the locations where packages can
> install.

You're not forced to do anything.

> In order to do that, we should first compose a complete include/exclude
> list where packages can install. I'd suggest the following:
>
> + /bin
> + /boot (but maybe just subdirectories so packages can't overwrite
> kernels?)
> [potentially + /dev? but that's useful only when tmpfs isn't mounted]
> + /etc
> + /lib, /lib32, /lib64
> + /opt
> + /sbin
> [potentially + /service for ugly daemontools]
> + /usr
> + /var
> - /usr/local
> - /usr/portage
>
> What are your thoughts on this?
>
> [1]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=410691#c4

I think it's feature creep - you can just set INSTALL_MASK="/usr/local
/usr/portage", no need for new features.

PS. I (and few other folks) don't have /usr/portage.

--
Krzysztof Pawlik <nelchael at gentoo.org> key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.