Bug#89473: PROPOSAL] dpkg-statoverride and Conflicts: suidmanager (<< 0.50)
>>"Julian" == Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk> writes:
Julian> On Mon, Mar 12, 2001 at 10:20:49PM -0800, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
>> The man page for dh_suidregister says that any package containing a
>> SUID/SGID binary no longer needs to use suidregister, instead, users
>> can use dpkg-statoverride as necessary.
>>
>> Policy (section 11.9, "Permissions and Owners") doesn't talk about
>> either way, but it should mention that suidregister should no longer
>> be used; also, that packages previously using suidregister should
>> Conflict: with suidmanager (<< 0.50).
>>
>> If I understand dpkg-statoverride correctly, mentioning that
>> dpkg-statoverride is not to be called from maintainer post/pre
>> install scripts should also be added.
Julian> Agreed.
Umm, why is this a matter of policy? This may belong in
developers reference, as the correct means of packaging suid stuff,
but there does not seem to be a _policy_ decision that needs to
happen. If I recall correctly, suidregister/suidmanager were never in
policy in the first place, and I do not think they should be inducted
in just when they are being phased out.
manoj
--
How can you work when the system's so crowded?
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: