[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gnulib] ensure that generated files are read-only
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gnulib] ensure that generated files are read-only |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Sep 2006 15:36:00 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.1 |
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I've always taken the stand that
> generated files should be read-only, and this is just another
> reason to follow that policy.
I'm vehemently opposed to such a change. On the contrary, I think the
policy should be that in a distrib tarball, _all_ files and directories
should be writable.
The reasons are:
1) For the user who unpacks and builds a package.
When he wants to remove the package, he will do "rm -r coreutils-6.2".
This will start asking questions. So he types Ctrl-C, and does
"rm -rf coreutils-6.2". And next time he will possibly use "rm -rf"
to avoid the problem.
But "rm -rf" removes anything, without safety measures. If he makes
a typo, he is hosed!
So by declaring some files read-only, you are degrading the safety
of users because they get accustomed to "rm -rf".
In other words, IMO, the read-only status should be reserved to
precious files.
2) For the user who needs to fix a compilation problem, or do minor
developments in a package.
In this case I _do_ want to change the Makefile or config.h, to see
the results. Because if I change Makefile.am or *.m4, I will have to
wait 5 minutes until aclocal, automake, autoheader, configure have
completed their business. Or even worse, I will get errors because
I don't have the "right" automake and autoconf versions installed.
When I modify a Makefile and, when trying to save it, am told
that I cannot save it, it's a major annoyance.
Furthermore, people who have not yet understood the complete machinery
don't know which file to modify to get a certain modification.
Sometimes I get fix suggestions from people who hand-modified the
'configure' file or so. If they are not able to do so, because
'configure' is read-only, they will likely not send anything useful,
maybe no bug report at all.
> Note that this does affect modules/* files owned by others.
> If anyone objects, I'll quickly revert the objectionable change.
Please revert. It is not acceptable for me to have read-only files in a
gettext or libiconv distribution.
> Bruno, would you mind if I changed the uses of "t-$@" to "address@hidden"
> in modules/localcharset?
Yes. The rule would not work right any more on 8+3 filesystems (DJGPP,
possibly also OS/2).
Bruno
Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Jim Meyering, 2006/09/08
Re: [bug-gnulib] ensure that generated files are read-only,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Simon Josefsson, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Simon Josefsson, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Bruce Korb, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Simon Josefsson, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Ralf Wildenhues, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Simon Josefsson, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Bruce Korb, 2006/09/07
- Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Simon Josefsson, 2006/09/08
Re: ensure that generated files are read-only, Jim Meyering, 2006/09/07