4 ms·

> In the process I pulled in a javascript dependency via policykit, which is giving me pause and I am re-evaluating if my approach is correct here. To be fair,

> In the process I pulled in a javascript dependency via policykit, which is giving me pause and I am re-evaluating if my approach is correct here. To be fair, policykit is great. It solves a real problem (namely is this user allowed to peform this action, which traditional POSIX permissions do not solve in a portably) in a very sane way that is totally optional to opt in to. Should polkit use a different, turing complete language than JavaScript? I don't know, probably, but it's not an awful choice. There is definitely more developer literacy for JS than, say, Lua or some other bespoke monstrosity they could've picked instead.

someperson 5y ago
Doesn't POSIX and Linux Standard Base already mandate certain scripting languages to be preinstalled, such as Python?
- thristian 5y ago
  I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it. POSIX-described Turing-complete interpreters include at leat the Bourne shell, awk, and sed, none of which you probably want to use for implementing a security policy. Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4), but that won't pacify anyone with an axe to grind about applications making Linux-specific assumptions. [1]: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Languages/LSB-Languages/book1.html https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Languages...
  - cesarb 5y ago
    > Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4) Wow, that didn't age well. That document actually says Python "2.4.2 or greater" and Perl "5.8.8 or greater", which doesn't help if the installed interpreters are Python 3.10 and Perl 6.c (2018.06), since both are greater than the specified versions but incompatible with them. Even if it had specified the major release (that is, Python 2.x greater than 2.4.2 and Perl 5.x greater than 5.8.8), that wouldn't help once those major releases are no longer maintained.
    - dale_glass 5y ago
      Perl 6 isn't really a thing anymore. Python3 requires some code changes, but on the whole is the same language. Perl 6 was intended to be an upgrade from 5, but over time developed into a completely new language that shared stylistic similarities to Perl 5. Perl 6 can't be compatible with Perl 5 to any large extent because XS isn't a thing anymore, so any modules that had binary parts to them can't be easily ported. These days Perl 6 got renamed to "Raku", to signify that it's its own, independent language. The Perl 5 line continues to exist and apparently plans for the next major version to be Perl 7.
  - gnubison 5y ago
    > I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it. It’s not: https://shellhaters.org https://shellhaters.org
chmod775 5y ago
> Lua or some other bespoke monstrosity Lua is definitely the opposite of 'bespoke monstrosity'. It's pretty much the intersection of tiny interpreter, fast execution, and simple language.
- xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
  Apologies if I mistyped this, Lua is not remotely a monstrosity. It's great! But I don't think it would be appropriate here, and I think more developers can grok JS in this day and age.

someperson 5y ago

Doesn't POSIX and Linux Standard Base already mandate certain scripting languages to be preinstalled, such as Python?

thristian 5y ago
I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it. POSIX-described Turing-complete interpreters include at leat the Bourne shell, awk, and sed, none of which you probably want to use for implementing a security policy. Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4), but that won't pacify anyone with an axe to grind about applications making Linux-specific assumptions. [1]: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Languages/LSB-Languages/book1.html https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Languages...
- cesarb 5y ago
  > Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4) Wow, that didn't age well. That document actually says Python "2.4.2 or greater" and Perl "5.8.8 or greater", which doesn't help if the installed interpreters are Python 3.10 and Perl 6.c (2018.06), since both are greater than the specified versions but incompatible with them. Even if it had specified the major release (that is, Python 2.x greater than 2.4.2 and Perl 5.x greater than 5.8.8), that wouldn't help once those major releases are no longer maintained.
  - dale_glass 5y ago
    Perl 6 isn't really a thing anymore. Python3 requires some code changes, but on the whole is the same language. Perl 6 was intended to be an upgrade from 5, but over time developed into a completely new language that shared stylistic similarities to Perl 5. Perl 6 can't be compatible with Perl 5 to any large extent because XS isn't a thing anymore, so any modules that had binary parts to them can't be easily ported. These days Perl 6 got renamed to "Raku", to signify that it's its own, independent language. The Perl 5 line continues to exist and apparently plans for the next major version to be Perl 7.
- gnubison 5y ago
  > I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it. It’s not: https://shellhaters.org https://shellhaters.org

chmod775 5y ago

> Lua or some other bespoke monstrosity Lua is definitely the opposite of 'bespoke monstrosity'. It's pretty much the intersection of tiny interpreter, fast execution, and simple language.

xyzzy_plugh 5y ago
Apologies if I mistyped this, Lua is not remotely a monstrosity. It's great! But I don't think it would be appropriate here, and I think more developers can grok JS in this day and age.