[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ESR: Goodbye Fedora

On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:55 -0800, Michael A Peters wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:22 -0500, Ric Moore wrote:
> > I think it might be wise to consider the old Caldera notion of
> > using /opt to contain all the goodies that you post install and wish to
> > be left alone. Then you merely fresh install the core apps while
> > leaving /opt (and /home /root) alone. It's worth a thought. Ric
> /opt should really only be used for self contained bundles.
That is sideways what I was getting out. Suppose I wanted to install
xmame and bunch of rom files. (arcade games) That could be considered a
bundle that I don't want tampered with? 

> IE you could put something like TeXLive in /opt (and many universities
> do just that) or Java in /opt etc.
I put java there myself, I see your point. Great minds! 

> Often it is /opt/vendor/product/version - so that multiple *self
> contained* versions can be parallel installed.
> If packages in /opt are installed by rpm then they need to use an rpm
> database located on /opt that is not the system rpm database - at which
> point, the benefits of using rpm pretty much disappear. A tarball with
> an md5sum list is then more practical.
> What would be *nice* would be if you could say -
> rpm database A is system database.
> rpm database B is /opt database.
> Packages in B can have their dependencies filled by A but packages
> installed in A can NOT have their dependencies filled by packages in B.
> packages in B can not install files outside of /opt
> Configuration option - packages in B can not install suid root binaries
> (that's actually easy, both the outside of /opt and suid issue -
> make /opt owned by a non root user that owns the rpm database and uses
> rpm to install into that database - then the OS refuses to install suid
> root files)
Wow, you HAVE thought this through. 

> All that needs to happen for that to work now is rpm needs to be able to
> check for dependency satisfaction in a database other than the target
> database. I suppose library paths would be an issue for .so files - and
> the users path would be an issue as well.

IMHO that would be a saving grace for Fedora to do something like that.
It would sure save what hair I have left. Ric

My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256 Sign up at: http://counter.li.org/

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]