Message: previous - next
Month: January 2011

Re: [trinity-users] Re: [Bulk] Re: [trinity-users] Trinity Usage Poll

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:42:59 -0600
> On 14/01/2011 05:21, Mike Bird wrote:
>> On Thu January 13 2011 19:01:09 David Hare wrote:
>>> Squeeze will very soon be released as new Debian stable. Many Lenny KDE
>>> users will dist-upgrade and won't like the result. I ran only Sid for
>>> some years and have experienced that already.
>> With the Squeeze release probably a few weeks away, and thousands of
>> Debian users likely to be looking for a way out of KDE4, is there any
>> chance of removing the conflicts that prevent a smooth Trinity install?
>> The main problems seem to be desktop-base-trinity (which conflicts with
>> desktop-base and therefore with gnome-core and kdm and much more) and
>> sudo-trinity (which conflicts at the file level with sudo and scares
>> people - why does a desktop want to replace a key piece of my security
>> infrastructure?)
>> I haven't yet been able to figure out the reason for requiring
>> trinitized
>> versions of these packages.
> +1
> (Your english is far better than mine to complain about this! ;-) )
> Maybe sudo-trinity was trinitized as a first way to ensure portability
> regardless distro's one (that may be too fresh or too old...?)
> I hope this will be fixed soon.
> To be honest, when I discovered Trinity I was very happy to be able to
> get back to KDE3 under Debian/Squeeze. And then, I asked aptitude to
> install Trinity and was close to give up when I read that original sudo
> package would be replaced be this "stranger's" sudo-trinity package. I
> even ask the debian-user-list about that.
> But still, I have no regrets for the moment!
> Nicolas

The reason for the third-party sudo is simply to add /opt/kde3/bin and
friends to the built-in RPATH variable, thus allowing Trinity applications
to be launched via "sudo <appname>", instead of "sudo
/opt/trinity/bin/<appname>".  That's the only change; if you don't trust
me grab the source of the official sudo package and the modified one and
run a diff between them. ;-)

As such, installation is optional but highly recommended if you use sudo

A far better method would be to allow a configuration file to add new
paths to an arbitrary location within the RPATH variable (thus not
requiring a recompiled version of sudo), but I don't think that will
happen for a long time, if ever.

Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion!