Дана Sunday 05 February 2006 18:35, Richard M. Stallman је написао(ла): > What he's saying is, > rather than doing this, you should just have a utility that keeps the > PATH environment variable updated (by adding hte packages' bin/ and > sbin/ directories), updates ld.so.conf, and so on. > > This would be a big step backward. It would result in gigantic PATH > values, and the result would be that it is essentially useless and > painful for users to set PATH themselves.
How about a daemon (or service, or translator, or whatever) that would monitor the "/Programs" directory where the new programs are installed. And when that daemon sees a new program it automagicaly does a "ln -s" for binaries, includes, libraries, etc. That "daemon" could be triggered by the installation program, or it could just look into /Programs from time to time to see if there are new directories around (or it could just be croned to run every few minutes to update the envvars if needed). > Meanwhile, given the way envvars are inherited by child processes, > it would be hard for this updating to propagate down to existing > child processes. Of course. It doesn't make sense to change the envvars in the runtime. It probably could be done, but all the programs that use envvars would have to implement some sort of signal-handler that would update internal envvars and process them to see if they are useful to the program or not. -- Filip Brcic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WWWeb: http://purl.org/NET/brcha/home/ Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ# 40994923 Yahoo! brcha MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpjMYvtSx6ZR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
