On 23/08/10 19:53, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
[2010-08-23 19:15:13 +0100] Magnus Therning:
Is this *really* bad, in fact so bad that upstream should be told about it, since it doesn't only affect packagers? (AFAICS the build system provided by upstream only works for individual users installing a personal build.)
It's not that bad: at build time, after the main binary has been built, it is run to generate a configuration file - and this binary happens to always create ~/.program.d/ when it doesn't exist. Now, during the build process, this directory is never actually used and remains empty until the end of it (so you can build as nobody and then install system-wide).
I would still argue that it's completely bonkers behaviour! I would *never* expect that building a piece of software would modify my $HOME. I've also never ever heard of such behaviour before.
I really can't blame them for assuming $HOME is writable (both normally, and at build time, since it simplifies their build process); I see this as a rather unfortunate interaction with makechrootpkg.
I blame them for writing in $HOME! From the sounds of it they are just lazy; there should be a command line switch to control whether the directory (~/.program.d/) is created. Anyway, I can understand *your* actions: modifying Arch stuff so that you can build in a chroot rather than apply a patch to the source. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe