Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@g.o>
From: Martin Lesser <gentoo@...>
Subject: Policy violation possible (concerns openldap/nss_ldap)
Date: 18 Jun 2003 19:36:34 +0200
Yesterday we upgraded net-libs/nss_ldap/nss_ldap-207.ebuild to
net-libs/nss_ldap/nss_ldap-207-r1.ebuild and encountered an IMO fatal
error concerning writing into /etc *without* respecting the protection
of conf-files.

The relevant lines from src_install() of the different ebuilds are:

nss_ldap-202.ebuild:
  dosym /etc/openldap/ldap.conf /etc/ldap.conf
(That's ok)

nss_ldap-207.ebuild:
  insinto /etc/openldap
  doins ldap.conf
  dosym /etc/openldap/ldap.conf /etc/ldap.conf
(That's ok)

Until here /etc/ldap.conf was a symlink which was created or maintained
also by at least one other package (openldap itself), but

nss_ldap-207-r1.ebuild changed it totally:
  insinto /etc
  doins ldap.conf

So the symlink was overwritten with the vanilla configuration what - in
our case - caused several applications which depend on ldap to not work
properly any longer. That was really bad.

How can one prevent such an IMO unacceptable behavior of overwriting
config-files which are symlinks? Should this be seen as bug in
gentoo/emerge?

Have the changes described above to be reported as bug in nss_ldap?

How can we ensure the integrity of conf-files used by more than one
package when different packages use different locations for the *same*
configuration (a bad thing anyway)?

Martin

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies:
Re: Policy violation possible (concerns openldap/nss_ldap)
-- paul
Re: Policy violation possible (concerns openldap/nss_ldap)
-- Donny Davies
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
GRUB/LILO/syslinux gfxboot
Next by thread:
Re: Policy violation possible (concerns openldap/nss_ldap)
Previous by date:
Re: broken portage ;P and yes .. it's my fault .. sortoff
Next by date:
Re: Policy violation possible (concerns openldap/nss_ldap)


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.