On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 04:22:44PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 at 16:15, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 05:50:54PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote:
>On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 at 14:30, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> >I'm not a huge fan of using relative symlinks, especially if the tool> >is run as root. In my experience that makes things harder to audit and
>> >prevent accidental breakages.
>>
>> I'm completely in the opposite camp. Relative symlinks actually make
>> sure the thing you are running is what you are expecting. Nothing should
>> really point outside of $prefix expecting that is mounted on /.
>>
>
>That is true and I fully agree. Yet the contents of DESTDIR are not
>meant to be run as-is - it's used for "staging" [1].
>
>[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/DESTDIR.html
>
>> Several years back there was also the issue with packaging, which would
>> complain when symlinks pointed outside what was being packaged. It is
>> dangerous when using absolute symlinks because if the tool used to copy
>> follows the symlinks, it ends up with the wrong binary, copying the host
>> bin rather than what was just built.
>>
>
>That sounds like a horrible bug, which can easily break your system
>regardless of the project.
>
>Would you consider dropping the leading `./` aka can we use `$(LN_S)
>kmod $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/$$tool;`?
>Seems to be prevailing on my system with over 90% instances.
seems good to me. I will squash that and push.
sorry I went on vacations and didn't realize I hadn't pushed.
Now it's in and with the other patches fixing make distcheck
we are clear for a release. I will prep that this week.
thanks
Lucas De Marchi
Respectful poke?
Thanks
Emil
