[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Problem with lprng turned out to be problem with dpkg?

Michael Alan Dorman <mdorman@calder.med.miami.edu> writes:

> But then _every_ maintainer has to get it right, or he or she could
> break the system (what if they accidentally include a /tmp dir with
> the wrong perms?), whereas now, if one maintainer gets it wrong, he or
> she will only likely break one subsystem.

I recognize that, but why would a maintainer be putting inappropriate
*leaf* directories in their packages.  If they do, then bug reports
get filed, and the problem gets fixed on the next package release.

The problem with the current system is that every slip up forces
another correction into the postinst that has to stay there for the
life of the package (because we can't know how long the old broken
versions are out there).  This isn't that big a deal, but it's
certainly ugly.

I do agree that either solution is unsatisfactory, and that my
proposed change could easily cause more problems than it solves, so
what if we left things as they are, but have dpkg check the
permissions in the file system against the archive, and scream bloody
murder if they differ.  This would get the problem fixed in a hurry
when broken packages are released.


Reply to: