Re: New schemas aren't picked up by running gconfd-2 [was Re: rawhide report: 20060125 changes]

[Mark Rosenstand <rosenstand gmail com>]

On 1/26/06, Mark McLoughlin <mark skynet ie> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 12:21 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Debian ships a gconf-schemas script that takes care of everything that
> > is needed for a package post-installation. It takes the schemas in a
> > specific directory (in /usr/share instead of /etc), registers them to a
> > specific GConf source (in /var/lib instead of /etc), and runs the
> > killall -HUP, all of that without cluttering /root/.gconf like gconftool
> > normally does.
>
>         There shouldn't be a need for all distros to have something like this -
> GConf upstream should be able to ship a tool that can do everything
> needed to cleanly install schemas which is used both from Makefiles and
> packages post-install sections.
>
>         Now, that we could take the Debian script and make it suitable for
> upstream, and then change all the Makefiles and packages on other
> distros to use it ... or we could just make gconftool-2 do the right
> thing ... ?

The right thing is to not depend on post-install scripts if not
*absolutely* necessary. There are other vendors (and users) out there
than those who ship rpm, dpkg and other "advanced" package managers.

Why is this registration required? Most of our shells have no trouble
locating new binaries in $PATH. For the new merged-tree approach,
though, perhaps it would be needed to generate the file on request
(think "rehash" in tcsh).