Re: Re: Question wrt dual-PEAR

On Monday 31 January 2005 08:17 pm, Greg Beaver wrote: > Ian Eure wrote: > > On Monday 31 January 2005 03:40 pm, Greg Beaver wrote: > >>If you wish a superuser to install, the best solution is to distribute a > >> file with debian, /root/.pearrc. This file would define the install > >>directories to be /usr/local/share/php/XXX. Creating this file is > >>somewhat risky in the sense that some users may already have a .pearrc > >>file in /root. Would debian be smart enough to not modify an existing > >>.pearrc? > > > > I believe this violates Debian policy. > > Sounds like they need to re-evaluate their policies? ;) > Because automatically installing stuff in home directories is a /great/ idea. (Tongue firmly in cheek.) > Seriously though, the way PEAR works is there is a system configuration > file and a user configuration file. If you want two installations of > PEAR, the PEAR way is to have 2 configuration files, one for each > installation. In this way, the PEAR installer elegantly allows install > of local copies of a package. > I've never tried this type of setup. Are dependencies from the system installation considered when installing something into the user's installation? > The debian package manager could easily wrap the pear command, as Alan > Knowles suggests, and pass in a hard-coded user config file if it isn't > specified on the command-line. > > In other words, the pear script would be called with > > pear -c /path/to/debian_usr_local_share/pear.conf $@ > Unless you're talking about just packing up a PEAR .tgz file and calling the pear install command from the postinst script, this will /never/ happen. Dpkg is a critical part of the Debian system, and there's no way a change to support one supplier's idea of What's Right(tm) would get accepted.

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature]