Re: ITS: webfs (updated package)
fredag den 3 december 2010 klockan 13:54 skrev Jakub Wilk detta:
> * Alexander Reichle-Schmehl <firstname.lastname@example.org>, 2010-12-03, 13:43:
>>>> I'm looking at it now... Just one question, is there a reason why
>>>> you use "rm $TEMPCONFFILE 2>/dev/null || true" instead of "rm -f
>>>> It's not wrong, but longer ;)
>>> No really valid reason at all, only that the policy mandates maintainer
>>> scripts to append the "or-true construct" to capture exceptional states.
>> Yes, as many other programs don't allow you to catch things properly.
>> As said: Using "||true" is not false, it's just uncommon ;)
> I'd argue that the "|| true" variant is wrong.
> "rm -f $something" ignores only non-existent files.
> "rm $something 2>/dev/null || true" swallows all kind of possible
> errors. This is almost never what you want.
Good point. But which error is such that I am allowed to let postinst
stumble upon it in this particular case? According to policy it must
be caught and returned back as an error code.
The lack of "-f" in this case might theoretically (no "-i" present)
lead to a prompt from "rm", but the setting and capabilities in which
postinst is normally executed should make this extraordinarily unlikely.
In the particular case at hand, I am dealing with the removal of
a temporary file, used with mktemp at creation time, so one small
breach would be that a malicious intruded managed to find the file
name, and to delete said file, before the purge action came to its
That is the only exceptional state I can think of in my case,
but your distinction between "rm -f" and "or-true-compound"
is well phrased and worth observing.
Mats E A