Re: [gentoo-dev] CWD-relative ROOT support in portage: misfeature?

["Gregory M. Turner" <gmt@malth.us>]

On 8/18/2012 5:50 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> On 2012-08-17, at 11:00 PM, "Gregory M. Turner" <gmt@malth.us> wrote:
>
>>   greg@fedora64vmw /tmp $ mkdir foo
>>   greg@fedora64vmw /tmp $ ROOT=foo portageq envvar ROOT
>>   /tmp/foo/
>>
>> Does /anybody/ use this feature?
>
> Sorry for the HTML response... am on the road.
>
> I don't use the feature but I would fully expect said behavior. ie, going with the example above I would expect that I'd need   the / in front for the path to not be relative.

A user and maintainer of this (vapier) has emerged.  I pooh-poohed the 
relative-ROOT idea when I discovered it a few days ago, but I've 
flip-flopped.  I was concerned it would be exploitable by Bad 
People(tm), but I think it's no more exploitable than absolute-only 
ROOT, so long as its implemented correctly.

So far, nobody's turned up to advocate against the status quo (except 
me, but I'm fine with it now), so I think the matter can be considered 
resolved.

-gmt