On Mon, 2014-09-29 at 13:50 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > > On 2014-09-28 11:23, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > The logic for choosing the runtime directory is complicated enough > > also without adding PULSE_RUNTIME_PATH into the mix. XDG_RUNTIME_DIR > > is sufficient for users to control the runtime directory. > > PULSE_RUNTIME_PATH has not been documented, so this change doesn't > > constitute an interface break. > > A quick googling of PULSE_RUNTIME_PATH seems to indicate usage of this > environment variable in at least chromium and enlightenment, and also > recommended in several blog posts and mailing lists, including this one. > It is likely used in several home-made scripts. > > I'm hesitant to remove it for that reason. The argument that "if you use undocumented interfaces, you can only blame yourself if your script breaks" probably won't change your mind, so I guess we'll just have to make this a documented interface then. Glenn, more work for you :/ I said earlier that you could write the runtime directory documentation with the assumption that PULSE_RUNTIME_PATH doesn't exist, but we don't seem to be able to get rid of it after all. > The parts that just refactors "unsetenv" into "pa_unset_env" are acked > (and probably should have been in a separate patch anyway). Thanks, I pushed a patch that does only this. -- Tanu
