Re: [patch] Do not open Python scripts twice #2 [Re: [RFC] Crash sourcing Python script on Windows]

Jan Kratochvil
2012-01-24T19:41:27Z

On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:32:18 +0100, Doug Evans wrote:

Skipped the discussion what can be more statistically useful and rather chose:

> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 6:36 AM, Jan Kratochvil > <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> wrote:
> > And it does not make sense to discuss what is better or worse, it is only
> > important the standard is to not do directories relocation.
>
> Well, the important thing is to pick what works for the right reasons,
> not introduce unwarranted incompatibilities, etc.

If you want to patch other 10000 or how many packages so they all use
directory relocations, you are free to do. I prefer to remove the directory
relocations from the single (maybe there are few of such) differing GDB
package instead.

As a next step of this discussion I can only submit a ticket to FESCo (Fedora
Engineering Steering Committee) to validate whether my Fedora
non-relocatability patch/idea is right or not.

> [AIUC] I'd instead impose requiring chroot on Fedora package testers
> than regular users.

Normal users always use only the system installed GDB. Anything else is
unsupported.

> That still doesn't help me decide whether this patch should go in (as is).
> If you wanted to punt on windows and just always impose a double
> open(), I'd be ok with that, for example.

Without MS-Windows the Joel's patch would not be invented and we would just
always do single open() like before. Or I do not understand it now.

Thanks,
Jan