Re: Packages' use of dpkg-statoverride
On 17-Jan-01, 02:24 (CST), Stephen Zander <email@example.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "Matt" == Matt Zimmerman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Matt> In the first case, their override will be removed when they
> Matt> purge the package, while in the second it will not.
> What is the point of leaving an override arround for an executable
> that no longer exists? If the user has chosen to make some random,
> not-normally-suid executable into a suid executable we have no way of
> recognising this now; why should we start trying to?
1. Think about it the other way: a user may choose to make a normally
suid executable non-suid. We shouldn't lose this information except when
the package is purged; it is local configuration.
2. Matt was pointing out that the proposed techniques would result in
different behaviour based on a subtle difference in the way the override
3. I think we *do* have a way a tracking that now: suidmanager. Dpkg
statoverrides should be at least as functional as suidmanager.
Steve Greenland <email@example.com>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)