Forums » Suggestions
The Linux updater should check permissions on files at runtime.
This one has come up a few times on the Linux forum...
Make the installer check permissions on the ~/.vendetta directory and the files it needs to be able to write to in order to update the game and issue warnings if any of them can't be written by the current user. Don't stop the game from running, but warn the user so they know to fix it so it doesnt just up and break next time it updates.
It seems like checking if it's run as root might be a good idea to issue a warning as well since that's usually how people's file permissions get goofed up in the first place.
Make the installer check permissions on the ~/.vendetta directory and the files it needs to be able to write to in order to update the game and issue warnings if any of them can't be written by the current user. Don't stop the game from running, but warn the user so they know to fix it so it doesnt just up and break next time it updates.
It seems like checking if it's run as root might be a good idea to issue a warning as well since that's usually how people's file permissions get goofed up in the first place.
+1
+1 to both
Despite it is more a BUG than a suggestion / new feature request! Many user-centric apps refuse to run as root... and that makes sense, unless you're still locked in win98...
Despite it is more a BUG than a suggestion / new feature request! Many user-centric apps refuse to run as root... and that makes sense, unless you're still locked in win98...
Things that refuse to run as root piss me off. It is not up to the programmer to decide how the user uses his computer. A warning for certain programs is understandable, but an outright refusal is wrong. Particularly with mini Linuxes, it is not uncommon for the system to be designed to run as root in order to make it simpler (and they often have such different operating methods - e.g. Puppy Linux's frugal install - that being root is not really a bad thing).
Besides, root isn't necessarily always the problem. The more general solution is to check that the files belong to the user that is executing the program. If somebody installs VO as one user and then tries copying or moving it to a different location, for example into a guest account, they might screw up and leave it owned by the first user.
Besides, root isn't necessarily always the problem. The more general solution is to check that the files belong to the user that is executing the program. If somebody installs VO as one user and then tries copying or moving it to a different location, for example into a guest account, they might screw up and leave it owned by the first user.
I've personally never had a problem installing the game under various versions of Linux. I normally just do download the client and install it as non root. I do believe I tried the install via Ubuntu's app store deal once also after the devs mentioned it, and that was fine also.
Anyway, if they download it directly from VO's site it clearly states that:
"To install Vendetta, type "sh ./vendetta-linux-x-installer.sh". You do not need to be root; install it under your usual account."
+1 to OP.
Pizzasgood: Running shit as root isn't always a great idea. But ya, I suppose we could have a option on the install to do a system install accessible by all users on the box, or just as a single account.
Anyway, if they download it directly from VO's site it clearly states that:
"To install Vendetta, type "sh ./vendetta-linux-x-installer.sh". You do not need to be root; install it under your usual account."
+1 to OP.
Pizzasgood: Running shit as root isn't always a great idea. But ya, I suppose we could have a option on the install to do a system install accessible by all users on the box, or just as a single account.
Yes I realize that, but "isn't always" is not the same as "is never", which is my point. Anyway, nobody actually proposed that VO actually refuse to run. Alloh just kind of implied that that sort of thing is a good idea, so I'm just trying to nip that idea in the bud.
Ah, I tend to skip most of Alloh's drivel.
The main idea here is that the installer should check if it has the permissions to successfully install an update and notify the user if it doesn't instead of breaking in a weird way that's hard for the user to figure out. (since they have no idea what "upd23858.pch" is or where it came from or how the installer works internally)
I agree with pizzasgood in that it shouldnt prevent running as root, since there might be a reason why you'd want to do that. (Video or sound troubleshooting come to mind here.)
I agree with pizzasgood in that it shouldnt prevent running as root, since there might be a reason why you'd want to do that. (Video or sound troubleshooting come to mind here.)