GNU bug report logs - #59845
[PATCH 0/4] Add PMB (Integrated Library System)

Previous Next

Full log

Message #53 received at 59845 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: "yarl baudig" <yarl-baudig <at> mailoo.org>
Cc: Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>, 59845 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#59845: [PATCH 0/4] Add PMB (Integrated Library System)
Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2022 18:26:25 +0100

Hi,

"yarl baudig" <yarl-baudig <at> mailoo.org> skribis:

>> >
>> > Now, I see one solution to avoid the copy (and the chown), apart from the 
>> very first activation. That's keeping even more state into http-directory : 
>> for example a file ".version" with the hash of the pmb package used inside. 
>> That way we know if there's really an upgrade. What do you think?
>> 
>> It sounds like it’s going a bit far in terms of complexity.
>> 
>> Why do we need to copy these files every time?  Do they actually have to
>> be writable?  If not, whatever this copying step is doing could be done
>> in a ‘computed-file’.
>> 
>> Does that make sense?
>> 
>
> Hmm no, not really. Yes it has to be writable for the interactive initialization through web browser to take place. At least two operations take place there that need RW :
> 1/ renaming of both install.php and install_req.php.
> 2/ saving into a file the url and credentials for connexion to the database.

Credentials have to be handled out-of-band anyway (keep in mind that
/gnu/store is world-readable so in general we cannot have password in
transit via the store).

> There is no _need_ to copy every time. I did like this in my first patchs because it was _correct_ (I didn't think about efficiency then).
>
> That's why I am proposing the solution which copy only for the very fist activation and for the first activation after a package upgrade (or downgrade).
>
> I don't see how we could avoid this. I don't think it's a good idea to try to avoid the interactive installation as it gives informations and options on the installation to the user.

OK.

> Why "computed-file"?

Take it with a grain of salt because I still have an incomplete
understanding of the initialization process of PMB.

My thought was that, if there’s a “computation” (copying files around,
renaming some) that can be done once and for all, then we could do that
in ‘computed-file’.  But what you’re saying, IIUC, is that this is not
done “once and for all”.

HTH,
Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.