Hi Rich,
This might just be a late night brain fart, but I just thought of it now: in the rosdep package that we worked on, we've kept the "conf" files in /etc using the ghost etc. macro that rosdep will download. I was just wondering if they are really conf files and should go into /etc, or whether they're application data (default.list) and should maybe go into /var/lib or something? I mean, the user isn't expected to modify/customize these files, is he?
The sources_list.py file in the tar also refers to a cache directory, which could go into /var/cache?
On 03/15/2013 11:50 AM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi Rich,
This might just be a late night brain fart, but I just thought of it now: in the rosdep package that we worked on, we've kept the "conf" files in /etc using the ghost etc. macro that rosdep will download. I was just wondering if they are really conf files and should go into /etc, or whether they're application data (default.list) and should maybe go into /var/lib or something? I mean, the user isn't expected to modify/customize these files, is he?
The sources_list.py file in the tar also refers to a cache directory, which could go into /var/cache?
Hi Ankur,
I put them in /etc because that's how upstream does it, but you're right, it is something that should probably live in /var/cache. I'm pretty sure it doesn't get edited by users, so we should remove it from /etc.
I'll look into that when I apply the python-pip patch, hopefully it shouldn't be too hard to change. I'll also upgrade python-rosdep to the latest release while I'm looking at it.
Rich
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 19:12 -0400, Rich Mattes wrote:
I put them in /etc because that's how upstream does it, but you're right, it is something that should probably live in /var/cache. I'm pretty sure it doesn't get edited by users, so we should remove it from /etc.
Hi Rich,
I think a patch like this[1] should be enough. If it works, I could file a ticket with upstream requesting them to use /var/cache instead of /etc/ in accordance with the FHS. 'man hier' should be a reason compelling enough :)
I'm not quite sure how the package update will be handled though. We'll still have to carry /etc/ in the package list so it can be removed on update?
[1] http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/ros-groovy/rosdep-move-to-var-cache.patch
On 03/18/2013 08:10 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi Rich,
I think a patch like this[1] should be enough. If it works, I could file a ticket with upstream requesting them to use /var/cache instead of /etc/ in accordance with the FHS. 'man hier' should be a reason compelling enough :)
Yeah, python-rosdep is usually installed system-wide via pypi, so it shouldn't mess with parallel installation of ros distros in /opt/ros. I did check the default sources.list, and it technically is user-editable, even if it doesn't happen very often. I'm still leaning towards thinking it is more like a repo listing (akin to yum's repodata in /var/cache/yum) than a repository definition (akin to /etc/yum/repos.d/*.repo), but you could make the case either way.
I'm not quite sure how the package update will be handled though. We'll still have to carry /etc/ in the package list so it can be removed on update?
I think maybe we should run this by upstream before making the change. It goes against a lot of documentation currently on the web about rosdep issues. I'll go ahead and update to 0.10.14 with your python-pip patch in the meantime. Do you want to file an issue or should I?
Rich
On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 20:32 -0400, Rich Mattes wrote:
Do you want to file an issue or should I?
Hi Rich,
I filed an issue here[1]. Please comment and add to it if you think I haven't presented the case well enough.
[1] https://github.com/ros/rosdep/issues/232
On 03/18/2013 09:32 PM, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Hi Rich,
I filed an issue here[1]. Please comment and add to it if you think I haven't presented the case well enough.
I read it over, it looks good. I went ahead and subscribed to the issue so I can follow what's going on.
Rich
robotics@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Ankur Sinha -
Rich Mattes