[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#51512] [PATCH v 2]: gnu: Add bash-bcu.
From: |
david larsson |
Subject: |
[bug#51512] [PATCH v 2]: gnu: Add bash-bcu. |
Date: |
Tue, 09 Nov 2021 13:32:28 +0100 |
On 2021-11-07 13:40, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
David,
Thank you!
(One fire's out, you'll be glad to hear, so in return here's most of a
review. I still reserve the right to tinker with the hunk below —
you'll see which — later today.)
Thanks for the review, it feels like I learn a lot from this :-)
Not sure if u intended to attach ur modified version of the patch when
you replied or not. I have however made the changes you suggested in a
version2 and attached.
[...]
+ (display
+ (string-append
+ "[[ \"$_BCU_SH_LOADED\" == YES ]] || { \nexport
PATH=\""
+ pathline "${PATH:+:}${PATH}\"\nexport PYTHONPATH=\""
+ pylibsline "${PYTHONPATH:+:}${PYTHONPATH}\"\nexport
GUILE_LOAD_PATH=\""
+ g-bash-lib
"${GUILE_LOAD_PATH:+:}${GUILE_LOAD_PATH}\"\n"
+ ;; XDG_DATA_DIRS needs set for yad to load icons
properly
+ "[[ -e /run/current-system/profile/share ]] &&
export XDG_DATA_DIRS="
+
"/run/current-system/profile/share${XDG_DATA_DIRS:+:}${XDG_DATA_DIRS}\n"
+ ;; Ensure that the setuid version of ping is used
+ "[[ -e /run/setuid-programs/ping ]] && "
+ "ping(){ /run/setuid-programs/ping \"$@\" ; } &&
export -f ping\n"
+ "[[ -e /run/setuid-programs/ping6 ]] && "
+ "ping6(){ /run/setuid-programs/ping6 \"$@\" ; } &&
export -f ping6\n}\n")
+ bcu-port)
+ (display (string-append "source " libexec "/bcu.sh\n")
bcu-port)
+ (close-port bcu-port)
[So this is the part I was waiting to finish :-) I still don't have
time now.]
I really want to rewrite this whole block, but for now I just have 1
question: why not simply append /run/setuid-programs to the start of
$PATH here? What's the difference, if any, and do we care?
Basically just to make minimal disruption of the the current environment
when you source bcu.sh. Almost certainly a non-issue 99.9% of cases,
i.e. I think that just prepending /run/setuid-programs to PATH would be
fine as well.
+ (license license:gpl3))))
Why not lgpl3+? I can't find the gpl3-only file(s).
I really don't know enough about licensing to answer this very well
unfortunately.. bash-coding-utils is to a large extent a remix of
stackoverflow contributions (CC-BY-SA-4.0) and other small libraries,
some of which have GPLv3+ stated at the top (e.g. src/csv/csv/csv.scm).
I want to apply whatever license must be applied based on the included
software and SO snippets. If it needs to be lgpl3+ or GPLv3 in the end
does not matter much to me (Im the author of bash-coding-utils).
Best regards,
David
0001-gnu-Add-bash-bcu.patch
Description: Text Data