From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Suppressing native compilation (short and long term) Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 19:59:00 +0300 Message-ID: <83czba17sb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bkqxf1ij.fsf@tethera.net> <8335c9dkyf.fsf@gnu.org> <83edvqafr7.fsf@gnu.org> <83h70m19yv.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="388"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: tomas@tuxteam.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: chad Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 02 18:59:57 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1of2Jo-000AUK-N7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:59:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52224 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2Jm-0006nQ-Or for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:59:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2J3-00067p-Q5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:59:09 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:54086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2J3-00014g-CM; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:59:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=XXBBHmu/Ky9xd/ZJy9U/pzOWPGjAvyybOVxDBT++m10=; b=aAmccogLtFKx SJ3H3G4XX3WBTUnd/b44IpSB/J8P1vzf8lNkgZ5TO8c5ltXma9NdSegIc6Et7JIQ9+NQiMoEAqhrR 2klaYqDWOz0NBNxLBTQrlWBrn57mQ5dSAN/Gj937EVwWC/mojCo4p2pqWroVTEDjUC/VkmRsIoFpE EmXRkvgY+4BdkhExaQA8BA2NGlaRh6Uh/MMwXqyPkTmrj/ybF+tMhJocvBzChM4qyXXLh0QOzY5Gr NFhqUL+Z/H1SVLuelAHq2FigWsmyc3WE6Q9x/HPoa0TJj/1I2Y4sRKq0/umJy0VqQpQQkt89v15wg Fhkxr03LIRqt2CX15Xrzyw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2499 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2J2-0002EC-NR; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:59:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from chad on Sun, 2 Oct 2022 12:23:43 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:296643 Archived-At: > From: chad > Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2022 12:23:43 -0400 > Cc: tomas@tuxteam.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > User separation goes out of the window, and this is one important > > service the OS provides. To illustrate, one user could put malicious > > .eln files all other users would execute. > > This is about installation writing files into a shared space on disk, > right? If so, this is something for the Debian packagers to figure > out, because doing that is their request. And anyway, I don't > understand how do *.eln files are different from *.elc files, which > are already written to shared disk space upon installation. What am I > missing? > > At the risk of over-explaining due to message crossing mid-flight: the thing you might be missing is that > Debian provides a mechanism for people to install *.elc files in a space shared by all users that is not > writable by those users, and there are people that use this provision. Since these are used for *.elc files, it > seems highly likely that they will be desired for *.eln files. No, I don't think the similar handling makes sense here. The *.elc files are architecture- and configuration-independent, whereas the *.eln files are not. E.g., the same foo.elc could be used by user A who runs Emacs 28 and by user B who runs Emacs 29. But the corresponding *.eln files will be different, even though they were produced from the same foo.el. > Even in the face of a theoretical issue like "potential package combinations make it unworkable to pre-build a > single set of emacs+emacs-packages", the practical situation is that such combinations exist and are used > by Debian users to build a stable base of emacs+emacs-packages that is shared across users who > cannot change that shared base (but can, of course, supplement it with their own packages, via site-lisp, > user packages, etc.) As a practical goal, there is at least *some* impetus for Debian to provide such a stable > base, and to make it as wide as reasonable. The basic mechanism for determining the size of that base is > "which emacs-packages are made into debian-packages", (iff I understand correctly; I'm not a Debian > expert). I don't think this is relevant to the issue at hand.