Attn: Install path debaters

[Ian Bruene]

On 01/04/2018 01:21 PM, Gary E. Miller via devel wrote:
>> What are these other issues?
> The FHS, Gentoo, and AFAIK all distros, do not include /usr/local/XX
> in any enviroment PATHs.

Ubuntu does. Did people just not usually use /usr/local/ much in the 
Eldar Days? That would explain it not being part of FHS but distros 
moving towards including it.

> So, when I install NTPsec in /usr/local, I need to be sure I
> have added /usr/local/XX to at least:
> 	PATH
> 	MANPATH
> 	PYTHONDIR
>
> OTher things installed in /usr/local may also require adding /usr/local
> to:
> 	INFOPATH
>          PKG_CONFIG_PATH
> 	LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>
> And there are more not wide used.
>
> 'Fixing' just PYTHONPATH, and ignoring the others is touching only
> part of the problem.

Ooookaaayyy..... That is a much bigger problem. If what you are 
describing is true how is the build working /at all/ on non-Debian systems?

> If anything is going into /usr by default, that is new, and very, very
> bad.  That conflicts with FHS and the policy of every distro I know of.

Not by default, but if the provided paths don't show up in sys.path it 
does. And this is not a new problem, you came across it some time ago, 
but no fix has been decided on as of yet.

> Yes, and also the binaries, man pages, and other things.  This is
> by design, dating back to UNIX tradition in the 1970's, still embedded
> firmly in the FHS, etc.

Why then did the documentation only talk about adding to PYTHONPATH?

>>       bad: apparently breaks inter-version seals between different
>> copies of NTP. But this is true of any distro with /usr/local/
>>       good: it doesn't bypass python versioning <--- This is a Huge
> Uh, no.  Until the user sets his PATH, MANPATH, INFOPATH, PYTHONPATH, etc.
> the traditional way does NOT break the NPT in /usr.

Not a particularly relevant detail; if it is used to breaks the seal. 
One might also say that if it isn't built it won't have bugs.

>>       neutral: I'll bet that this doesn't solve the specific variant
>> of the problem that I've encountered (a weird variant)
> You only have a problem because you have not properly configured your
> many PATH variables yet.
>
>> IMHO if we end up defaulting to the old method we should suggest the
>> user create a .pth file instead of PYTHONPATH.
> I suggest we give him both options.  .pth file is not an option for
> many.
>
>> PYTHONPATH is a mess for this kind of thing.
> Really???  So PATH, MANPATH, INFOPATH, LD_CONFIG_PATH, etc. are somehow
> easy for you, but PYTHONPATH is not easy????  This is ONE LINE in ONE
> FILE.

Ok, now I have to describe the bug I encountered (yes, already filled a 
report upstream). On my system any version of python 3 gives a 
/usr/local/ install path for version "python3". But it only adds paths 
for "python3.<n>" under /usr/local/.

This is what I mean when I say that PYTHONPATH is a mess for this kind 
of thing. You can't tell it to add a path for certain versions of python 
only. You can tell it to use a specific path, or you can tell it to use 
a path with the standard subdirectories which the sys.path builder 
script will then add.

-- 
/"In the end; what separates a Man, from a Slave? Money? Power? No. A 
Man Chooses, a Slave Obeys."/ -- Andrew Ryan

/"Utopia cannot precede the Utopian. It will exist the moment we are fit 
to occupy it."/ -- Sophia Lamb

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180104/8e7fa575/attachment.html>