Build systems and `uinstall` option

[Joursoir]

Hello everyone,

I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's Makefile?
Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?

The same question is related to the meson script.

[Thomas Heijligen]

Hi Joursoir,

the 'uninstall' should be performed by the package manager or 'rm'.
Also the Makefile or other build scripts are not part of the flashrom
installation.

To remove build artifacs you can run 'make clean' for Make or 'rm -r
<build_dir> on Meson.

-- Thomas

On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 13:59 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's
> Makefile?
> Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?
>
> The same question is related to the meson script.

[Joursoir]

Hello Thomas,

Of course, `uninstall`/`install` options should be performed by the
package manager, but not limited to this. Otherwise, why do we need
`install` option in the Makefile?

It's just strange, that a person can download flashrom sources, use
`install` options and then find out that there's no `uninstall` option.

On Mon, 07 Nov 2022 14:20:34 +0000
Thomas Heijligen  wrote:
> Hi Joursoir,
>
> the 'uninstall' should be performed by the package manager or 'rm'.
> Also the Makefile or other build scripts are not part of the flashrom
> installation.
>
> To remove build artifacs you can run 'make clean' for Make or 'rm -r
> <build_dir> on Meson.
>
> -- Thomas
>
> On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 13:59 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's
> > Makefile?
> > Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?
> >
> > The same question is related to the meson script.
>
> flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

[Thomas Heijligen]

Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know none.
The install target is for copying all necessary files into the correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or a other program is responsible.

-- Thomas

On November 8, 2022 10:13:34 AM GMT+01:00, Joursoir  wrote:
> Hello Thomas,
>
> Of course, `uninstall`/`install` options should be performed by the
> package manager, but not limited to this. Otherwise, why do we need
> `install` option in the Makefile?
>
> It's just strange, that a person can download flashrom sources, use
> `install` options and then find out that there's no `uninstall` option.
>
> On Mon, 07 Nov 2022 14:20:34 +0000
> Thomas Heijligen  wrote:
> > Hi Joursoir,
> >
> > the 'uninstall' should be performed by the package manager or 'rm'.
> > Also the Makefile or other build scripts are not part of the flashrom
> > installation.
> >
> > To remove build artifacs you can run 'make clean' for Make or 'rm -r
> > <build_dir> on Meson.
> >
> > -- Thomas
> >
> > On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 13:59 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> > > Hello everyone,
> > >
> > > I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's
> > > Makefile?
> > > Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?
> > >
> > > The same question is related to the meson script.
> >
> > flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

[Nico Huber]

On 08.11.22 11:33, Thomas Heijligen wrote:
> Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know none.

For some projects `make uninstall` used to be as usual as `make
install`. Maybe it's a GNUism, though, I don't know. It seems good
practice nevertheless.
> The install target is for copying all necessary files into the correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or a other program is responsible.

There's often no single program responsible for the whole filesystem.
And if we'd want to make the user responsible, we should have it docu-
mented what files are installed. I don't know if we have.

Nico

[Joursoir]

On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:33:50 +0000 Thomas Heijligen 
wrote:
> Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know
> none.

Standard unix password manager (pass), MidnightCommander, Dovecot, claws
and most of the GNU program. And these are just the programs that first
came to my mind.
> The install target is for copying all necessary files into the
> correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or a
> other program is responsible.

The uninstall target is for deleting all program's files from the
correct place. Otherwise, a user will have to go through the Makefile,
find out the values of variables that are used in install target and
delete it by hand. A user will obviously not be grateful to us for this.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:47:32 +0000 Felix Singer
 wrote:
> However, an uninstall target doesn't make sense since there are way
> too many unknown variables and what not.

As far as we introduced install target, we take this responsibility and
know the paths where all the necessary files are installed.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:33:50 +0000 Thomas Heijligen 
wrote:
> Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know
> none. The install target is for copying all necessary files into the
> correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or a
> other program is responsible.
>
> -- Thomas
>
> On November 8, 2022 10:13:34 AM GMT+01:00, Joursoir
>  wrote:
> > Hello Thomas,
> >
> > Of course, `uninstall`/`install` options should be performed by the
> > package manager, but not limited to this. Otherwise, why do we need
> > `install` option in the Makefile?
> >
> > It's just strange, that a person can download flashrom sources, use
> > `install` options and then find out that there's no `uninstall`
> > option.
> >
> > On Mon, 07 Nov 2022 14:20:34 +0000
> > Thomas Heijligen  wrote:
> > > Hi Joursoir,
> > >
> > > the 'uninstall' should be performed by the package manager or 'rm'.
> > > Also the Makefile or other build scripts are not part of the
> > > flashrom installation.
> > >
> > > To remove build artifacs you can run 'make clean' for Make or 'rm
> > > -r <build_dir> on Meson.
> > >
> > > -- Thomas
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 13:59 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> > > > Hello everyone,
> > > >
> > > > I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's
> > > > Makefile?
> > > > Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?
> > > >
> > > > The same question is related to the meson script.
> > >
> > > flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> >
> > flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

[Felix Singer]

I think we can shorten the discussion with this:

The Make build system is going to be deprecated with the next release
and it is going to be dropped with the release after that. It's
contradictory to announce its deprecation on the one hand while adding
new features on the other.

We discussed the Make build system in many meetings now and we all
agreed that we won't add any more features to it. That means its
current feature state is frozen and it doesn't get any additional
functionality, just bug fixes, refactorings or adjustments as far as
they are really necessary.

With the next release Meson becomes our primary build system, which
even comes with an uninstall command as Richard mentioned, and users
should be discouraged from using the Make build system. At this point
it will be just kept for backwards compatibility and to give people the
time migrating over. Further effort on this topic seems unproductive.

On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 15:38 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:33:50 +0000 Thomas Heijligen 
> wrote:
> > Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know
> > none.
>
> Standard unix password manager (pass), MidnightCommander, Dovecot,
> claws and most of the GNU program. And these are just the programs
> that first came to my mind.

I looked into these projects. I couldn't find an uninstall target
except for pass, which is implemented by themselves. The other projects
use additional build tools (autoconf, automake, not sure what else),
which generate a Makefile based on your given configuration. I assume
this will auto-generate an uninstall target as well, which is not
possible for us since we don't use these tools.
> > The install target is for copying all necessary files into the
> > correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or
> > a other program is responsible.
>
> The uninstall target is for deleting all program's files from the
> correct place. Otherwise, a user will have to go through the
> Makefile, find out the values of variables that are used in install
> target and delete it by hand. A user will obviously not be grateful
> to us for this.

Until this point, I didn't even know about an uninstall target. I have
never heard or seen that anyone uses that. An "user" (who is the user
here?) shouldn't even need to run make install ;)

What's the "correct place"? What if users think `make uninstall` is
somehow hooked up to their package manager and it does the necessary
steps? What if people start using it and brick their system? Again, the
Makefile is not meant for users and we don't ship a "package" manager
with our build system.

It might be different if we auto-generate the build configuration, as
for example the other projects do you mentioned, since that
configuration is specific to your system and generated out of the
parameters and configuration you provided. This way you also don't have
to maintain paths and files at two different places which makes is much
less error-prone.

Our Make build system highly depends on given variables for every Make
call and we don't auto-generate a build configuration for the
underlying system.
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:47:32 +0000 Felix Singer
>  wrote:
> > However, an uninstall target doesn't make sense since there are way
> > too many unknown variables and what not.
>
> As far as we introduced install target, we take this responsibility
> and know the paths where all the necessary files are installed.

What responsibility are you talking about? We are not responsible for
anyones system nor do we know anything about them. Our Make build
system does not come with a managing functionality.

// Felix

[Thomas Heijligen]

Ok, if you think this is usefull, and you can implement it in a
reliable way, go ahead. Please be aware, that we want to deprecate the
Makefile in the future.

Personally I think the uninstall target is just a relict form the old
days and lost it's usefulness on modern system.

-- Thomas

On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 15:38 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:33:50 +0000 Thomas Heijligen 
> wrote:
> > Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know
> > none.
>
> Standard unix password manager (pass), MidnightCommander, Dovecot,
> claws
> and most of the GNU program. And these are just the programs that
> first
> came to my mind.
> > The install target is for copying all necessary files into the
> > correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or
> > a
> > other program is responsible.
>
> The uninstall target is for deleting all program's files from the
> correct place. Otherwise, a user will have to go through the
> Makefile,
> find out the values of variables that are used in install target and
> delete it by hand. A user will obviously not be grateful to us for
> this.
>
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:47:32 +0000 Felix Singer
>  wrote:
> > However, an uninstall target doesn't make sense since there are way
> > too many unknown variables and what not.
>
> As far as we introduced install target, we take this responsibility
> and
> know the paths where all the necessary files are installed.
>
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2022 10:33:50 +0000 Thomas Heijligen 
> wrote:
> > Do you know an other project providing a uninstall script? I know
> > none. The install target is for copying all necessary files into
> > the
> > correct place in the filesystem hierarchy. After that the user, or
> > a
> > other program is responsible.
> >
> > -- Thomas
> >
> > On November 8, 2022 10:13:34 AM GMT+01:00, Joursoir
> >  wrote:
> > > Hello Thomas,
> > >
> > > Of course, `uninstall`/`install` options should be performed by
> > > the
> > > package manager, but not limited to this. Otherwise, why do we
> > > need
> > > `install` option in the Makefile?
> > >
> > > It's just strange, that a person can download flashrom sources,
> > > use
> > > `install` options and then find out that there's no `uninstall`
> > > option.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 07 Nov 2022 14:20:34 +0000
> > > Thomas Heijligen  wrote:
> > > > Hi Joursoir,
> > > >
> > > > the 'uninstall' should be performed by the package manager or
> > > > 'rm'.
> > > > Also the Makefile or other build scripts are not part of the
> > > > flashrom installation.
> > > >
> > > > To remove build artifacs you can run 'make clean' for Make or
> > > > 'rm
> > > > -r <build_dir> on Meson.
> > > >
> > > > -- Thomas
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 2022-11-07 at 13:59 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> > > > > Hello everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's
> > > > > Makefile?
> > > > > Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?
> > > > >
> > > > > The same question is related to the meson script.
> > > >
> > > > flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > > > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
> > >
> > > flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>
> flashrom mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]

[Felix Singer]

On Tue, 2022-11-08 at 13:13 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> Of course, `uninstall`/`install` options should be performed by the
> package manager, but not limited to this. Otherwise, why do we need
> `install` option in the Makefile?
>
> It's just strange, that a person can download flashrom sources, use
> `install` options and then find out that there's no `uninstall`
> option.

The install target is pretty much a standard in build systems. The
"standard" user (even these who compile flashrom by themselves) usually
doesn't use it though. People just run the software from that directory
when it's self compiled. The install target is mostly meant for package
maintainers or for people who know **exactly** what they do, since
running these commands might damage your system or bring it into an
undefined state. For example, if the software was installed through the
package manager before then its own data and state about that package
break and become inconsistent when you run the install target, which
breaks the package manager. And to make it worse, maybe the other
software installed on your system is not even compatible to your build.

In case of package maintainers, they mostly just specify the prefix
[1], run `make install` which sets up everything and then the package
is built out of it.

There are many operating systems out there and we don't know the users
environment. We just can't guess their environment or what they
intended their environment to be and so running any command with
privileged rights is **always** a risk. That's not our responsibility.

There are surely other cases where the install target is useful as
well. For example, when you want to build your system from scratch.
Another case might be, you are a developer, you want to have that
binary system-wide available for some reason and you want it in your
path temporarily. So you could set the PREFIX variable to /usr/local,
which is not managed by the package manager, do your thing and the
other system directories stay untouched.

However, an uninstall target doesn't make sense since there are way too
many unknown variables and what not.

// Felix

[1]
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/nixos-unstable/pkgs/tools/misc/flashro...

[Nico Huber]

Hi Felix,

On 08.11.22 11:47, Felix Singer wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-11-08 at 13:13 +0400, Joursoir wrote:
> However, an uninstall target doesn't make sense since there are way too
> many unknown variables and what not.

I'm sorry (also for the short reply) but this is just not true. We
generally expect the environment to follow some standards. The
`make install` target is or at least was for everyone with root
privileges. If nothing was broken, `make install` should install
into the `/usr/local/` hierarchy (default prefix). From [2]

Resembles `/usr` in structure, but its subdirectories are
            used for additions not part of the operating system
  /local    distribution, such as custom programs or files from a BSD
            Ports collection. Usually has subdirectories such as
            `/usr/local/lib` or `/usr/local/bin`.

Maybe it's been forgotten? but this is the simple mechanism that
should prevent all the bad things that you seem to worry about.

Nico

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_filesystem

[Nico Huber]

Hi Joursoir,

On 07.11.22 10:59, Joursoir wrote:
> I wonder why there is no 'uninstall' option in the flashrom's Makefile?
> Is it just an oversight? Or do we have a reason for that?

I assume it's more or less an oversight. It probably started with a
single file, then two, now it's three files that get installed. Maybe
it's just that nobody saw it necessary yet to add an `uninstall` target
for the few files.
> The same question is related to the meson script.

If Meson doesn't provide that yet, it might be something for the Meson
project?

Nico

[Richard Hughes]

On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 10:54, Nico Huber  wrote:
> If Meson doesn't provide that yet, it might be something for the Meson
> project?

[hughsie@hughsie-work build (master %)]$ ninja install
[0/1] Installing files.
Installing libflashrom.so.1.0.0 to /home/hughsie/.root/lib64
Installing libflashrom.a to /home/hughsie/.root/lib64
Installing flashrom to /home/hughsie/.root/sbin
Installing subprojects/cmocka-1.1.5/src/libcmocka.so.0.5.0 to
/home/hughsie/.root/lib64
Installing /home/hughsie/Code/flashrom/include/libflashrom.h to
/home/hughsie/.root/include/
Installing /home/hughsie/Code/flashrom/build/meson-private/flashrom.pc
to /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/pkgconfig
Installing /home/hughsie/Code/flashrom/build/flashrom.8 to
/home/hughsie/.root/share/man/man8
Installing symlink pointing to libflashrom.so.1.0.0 to
/home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.so.1
Installing symlink pointing to libflashrom.so.1 to
/home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.so
Installing symlink pointing to libcmocka.so.0.5.0 to
/home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libcmocka.so.0
Installing symlink pointing to libcmocka.so.0 to
/home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libcmocka.so
[hughsie@hughsie-work build (master %)]$ ninja uninstall
[0/1] /usr/bin/meson --internal uninstall
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.so.1.0.0
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.a
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/sbin/flashrom
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libcmocka.so.0.5.0
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/include/libflashrom.h
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/pkgconfig/flashrom.pc
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/share/man/man8/flashrom.8
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.so.1
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libflashrom.so
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libcmocka.so.0
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/lib64/libcmocka.so
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/share/man/man8
Deleted: /home/hughsie/.root/sbin
Uninstall finished.
Deleted: 13

Richard.

[Felix Singer]

On Tue, 2022-11-08 at 11:22 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 10:54, Nico Huber  wrote:
> > If Meson doesn't provide that yet, it might be something for the
> > Meson project?
> [0/1] /usr/bin/meson --internal uninstall

Interesting.. That is not documented in the man page and in the help
output.

// Felix