[gobolinux-users] Re: Files installed from one program to another

Hisham Muhammad hisham.hm at gmail.com
Thu Aug 11 17:20:14 GMT 2005

On 6/13/05, Jonas Karlsson <jonka750 at student.liu.se> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 09:08:15 +0200, Andy Feldman <nereusren at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 May 2005 18:15:47 +0200, Fabio Mierlo <geromao at gmail.com>  
> > wrote:
> >> Hi, a simple solution (I think) is add new directories in the
> >> package.
> >>
> >> For example, /Programs/foo/1.0/Root/Files/Plugins that will
> >> be linked in /Files/Plugins or in /System/Link/Files/Plugins.
> >
> > I modified some gobo Scripts to do something similar to what Fabio
> > suggested. Whenever my 'install' (which is called by make for copying
> > individual files) tries to put a file outside the sandbox, instead it
> > puts it at /Programs/[name]/[ver]/LinkedFiles/[original_target]. Then,
> > I modified SymlinkProgram to link anything in LinkedFiles to the place
> > where it was originally going to be put.

The idea is not bad at all. This is similar to the old
"mirror"/"MergeTree" scripts we used in the past. I have two concerns:
* it might lead to laziness, as we used to abuse "mirror" instead of
finding proper solutions for packages to cooperate.
* not all files are installed with the install command. Some use cp,
some use stranger methods. It's hard to catch all, though projects
like checkinstall (sp?) try to.

> I know this is not for production use but I think there's a bug in your  
> implementation of install. When I tried to build the kernel after I had  
> applied your patches I got some really strange errors after boot  
> (/dev/null not world writeable among others). Booting to the old kernel  
> didn't solved the problem and I haven't found a way to back out of that.  
> Maybe rebuilding the kernel without your patches.
> My point is that maybe install should honour
> sandbox_options = ( "--no-sandbox" )
> and install files where the installer wants them and not in  
> /Programs/Foo/x.yy/LinkedFiles/ as it seems that the kernel is touchy  
> about where the files (modules) recide.


> > I'd love to see this idea be part of the official Scripts if you guys
> > like it and think it is "gobo" enough, otherwise I will just keep
> > patching it into the new versions for my personal use :). Either way
> > I'd welcome any comments or improvements on it.

Maybe a way to have better control of it is to put a manifest file in
the recipe to indicate which files are supposed to be created.

I'm not applying this yet, but I'll keep an eye on your developments. :)

-- Hisham

More information about the gobolinux-users mailing list