X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=VNoYI/DX c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=5fe907f5
 a=+cj0cO56Fp8x7EdhTra87A==:117 a=ENFz0hfJacMNTMSKVvta9A==:17
 a=9+rZDBEiDlHhcck0kWbJtElFXBc=:19 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=zTNgK-yGK50A:10
 a=ZLGELXoPAAAA:8 a=Mj1Xp5F7AAAA:8 a=9Nluv-bIb_WHhyGEMG8A:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
 a=CFiPc5v16LZhaT-MVE1c:22 a=OCttjWrK5_uSHO_3Hkg-:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gsymcheck 'make check' failure final analysis
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 21 DOT 2012222348500 DOT 521 AT nimbus>
 <09a3adc8-401f-70fd-1ba4-c5cc850f62aa AT fastmail DOT com>
 <5a52e3b4-50a6-2b0e-7d7d-7eb144c5619f AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <ebab350e-1ca4-505f-2155-a376ca8350ac AT fastmail DOT com>
 <1d8bac3a-9787-dd41-9269-ab8d3d681754 AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <54c87596-c5ef-cfba-d74d-2fa6411b555f AT fastmail DOT com>
 <dc4e8a13-d29e-8c22-7957-77acacd2aba9 AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <796bed87-7c91-fe93-fbfa-7090c731be36 AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 22 DOT 394 DOT 2012271434420 DOT 2232 AT yoga>
 <c037a620-99de-8b31-88ac-ed0b24f4f8a3 AT epilitimus DOT com>
 <e8a3e15b-b7ff-d46d-b4ee-0b1aec553983 AT fastmail DOT com>
From: "Glenn (glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Message-ID: <cce60f7a-d240-3a0c-b1ef-afd44c6a67fd@epilitimus.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 14:17:20 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e8a3e15b-b7ff-d46d-b4ee-0b1aec553983@fastmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - delorie.com
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - epilitimus.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: authenticated_id: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Authenticated-Sender: a2plcpnl0121.prod.iad2.secureserver.net: glimrick AT epilitimus DOT com
X-Source: 
X-Source-Args: 
X-Source-Dir: 
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfNnYd1z8yekEL79TVWmfM/C+3Z/ey00zOfKZ+ZxIwWxsRQ9I7i0ZwqZdc9RnLcfCU8If99PMbgJ6TQ28YyuI7oecO0ZWEw7EsDPoJtsUt8TP+zjy28ME
 c7zNLEOztMl4utbpuHzIqkbbqOKwIr3i+7epCp15vgzRnsl1JLhgxjarXXyO4FTIeNZbBW/eT9JEJ0t80XCZdWArxuvAHW2xaiCNvsvhy5m7L4+e3XUDk0iK
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Girvin Herr (gherrl AT fastmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>
> I have been giving some thought about this problem overnight and I
> have decided this is not so much a bug in gEDA as it is a problem with
> my package build process. As observed, this failure only happens when
> the ~/.gEDA/gafrc file exists. Most people probably build the package
> as root, where this file is non-existent (if they are smart, they are
> not running gEDA programs as root), so they will not see this problem.
> However, my package build process has two stages. First, I build in my
> user account, which I do use for gEDA projects and it does have the
> ~/.gEDA/gafrc file. Then, when I am satisfied that that build stage is
> safe and correct, I go to stage 2, where, as root, I build the final
> package and install it.
>
I use the same technique since as 'me' the build can't write to any
system directories, which it shouldn't be trying to do anyway.

>
> IMHO, this is not a bug in gEDA and it may not be a good idea to
> incorporate test-specific code in gEDA, just to keep this "problem"
> silent. An example would be Volkswagen a few years ago was caught
> putting factory test code in their engine computers which disabled the
> emissions functions. This turned sour when the EPA discovered this
> code was running on their vehicles on the highway and polluting the
> air. As a result, VW got a stiff fine and their reputation is still
> not back to what it was before this incident.
>
Only reason I think it might be an issue is for people doing an upgrade
build. But Roland seems to have something up his sleeve that will make
it all moot. So other than putting in my two cents worth, which I think
I have, and lending a hand if asked I will probably just drop it.

My brain is happy having solved the problem. :)

Glenn