Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-27 Thread Brandin Creech
--- randhir phagura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>I tend to automate my install of most 'sub-systems' such as kde etc and > >>have always been doing configure and make as root. Am I doing something > >>wrong? > > >http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/introduction/unpacking.html > > I

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-27 Thread Simon Geard
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 07:52 +, randhir phagura wrote: > I will have to learn bash scripting to sufficient degree to be able to > become 'root' in the middle of an automating install script, at the 'make > install' stage for each package. As of now, I don't even know if it is > possible at al

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-27 Thread Lennon Cook
randhir phagura wrote: > I will have to learn bash scripting to sufficient degree to be able to > become 'root' in the middle of an automating install script, at the 'make > install' stage for each package. As of now, I don't even know if it is > possible at all. 'man su' -- Lennon Victor Cook --

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-27 Thread randhir phagura
Hi, Tushar Teredesai wrote on Tue, 27 Sep 2005: Why is it required that building of a package be done as an unprevilged user? I saw this indication in the Book too ("Now as root user issue the following command...") but never bothered to investigate. I tend to automate my install of most 'sub-

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-26 Thread Tushar Teredesai
On 9/24/05, randhir phagura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why is it required that building of a package be done as an unprevilged > user? I saw this indication in the Book too ("Now as root user issue the > following command...") but never bothered to investigate. I tend to automate > my install o

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-26 Thread Tushar Teredesai
On 9/24/05, Lennon Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually it's so I can tell easily which ones I've installed already; > and so that 'for i in /etc/gconf/schemas/* ; do gconftool-2 > --install-schema-file=$i ; done' doesn't reinstall things > unnecesarily. Instead of the for command above use

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-26 Thread Tushar Teredesai
On 9/23/05, David Ciecierski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This 'issue' does get a little tedious at times, because some packages' > make install fails when it cannot install schemas and/or update > scrollkeeper database. Some also ignore the --disable-schemas-install. > You then have to manually

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-25 Thread randhir phagura
Hi Lennon, Hi David, Thanks for your answers. I am obliged. Regards, Randhir Phagura -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-24 Thread David Ciecierski
In straight BLFS (without hints), it strictly isn't - it's > mostly a matter of you don't *need* to be root to build it, > and it is therefore good practice not to be. Exactly. It's basically added security - by building a package as non-root you elliminate the risk of dodgy / malicious config

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-24 Thread Lennon Cook
On 9/24/05, randhir phagura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why is it required that building of a package be done as an unprevilged > user? In straight BLFS (without hints), it strictly isn't - it's mostly a matter of you don't *need* to be root to build it, and it is therefore good practice not to be

GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread Lennon Cook
Kevin Jordan wrote: > I doubt anything needs the raw schema files Makes sense. Thanks. :-) > So I assume why you're asking is so you can delete them for space? Actually it's so I can tell easily which ones I've installed already; and so that 'for i in /etc/gconf/schemas/* ; do gconftool-2 --inst

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread David Ciecierski
There's an easy way around it with scrollkeeper Thanks, it didn't occur to me before. One 'problem' less then! -- David Ciecierski Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/m

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread Lennon Cook
On 9/23/05, David Ciecierski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The same applies to scrollkeeper. There's an easy way around it with scrollkeeper: chmod u+s `which scrollkeeper-update` . If you make it SUID the user that installed it, it will work fine. This isn't much an option with gconftool-2, unfort

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread David Ciecierski
Since I use the package user hint, when I build a package that installs GConf schemas I pass --disable-schemas-install to ./configure Could you enlighten me as to why this is necessary? It is because gconftool-2, as well as its configuration file and schema database belong to the gconf user

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread S. Anthony Sequeira
On Friday 23 September 2005 17:13, Kevin Jordan wrote: > On 9/23/05, Lennon Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since I use the package user hint, when I build a package that > > installs GConf schemas I pass --disable-schemas-install to ./configure > > , and install them manually as root afterward

Re: GConf / *.schemas question

2005-09-23 Thread Kevin Jordan
On 9/23/05, Lennon Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since I use the package user hint, when I build a package that > installs GConf schemas I pass --disable-schemas-install to ./configure > , and install them manually as root afterwards using gconftool-2. My > question is quite simply, can I then