FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Packaging

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:37 AM
Calum
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

Hello all,

I am rolling my own RPM to provide the correct sudoers config for the
company where I'm working.

I want it to archive the existing /etc/sudoers, and put down the company's one.

However, when I install it, I get:file /etc/sudoers from install of
sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package
sudo-1.7.2p1

There are two ways around it that I know:

1. Put the file down as /etc/sudoers.companyname, and mv it in the %post
2. Unpackage sudo, modify, and re-package.

I prefer not to do 2, as that will require keeping a close eye on the
security errata of the package, and repackaging every time a new
version is released. I'd rather keep the upstream package untouched,
and just apply my config over the top.

1 works fine - however, it breaks the rpm -V functionality, which in
my eyes is a big plus point for using RPMs.

Installing with --replacefiles will work - however - however, I want
to deploy the package with Puppet, and it doesn't seem to allow
specifying that.

Is there a way to create the RPM in such a way that --replacefiles is
"built-in" to the RPM?
Is there any other way of doing this - so that rpm -V works?

Calum
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:47 AM
Calum
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

Hello - just noticed the scope of this list:
"This mailing list provides a discussion forum for RPM packaging
standards and practices for Fedora."

Apologies for the post - I think I Googled for rpm mailinglist, and
ended up here.

Still, does anyone know the answer....?

Living in hope,
Calum

On 20 May 2011 09:37, Calum <caluml@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I am rolling my own RPM to provide the correct sudoers config for the
> company where I'm working.
>
> I want it to archive the existing /etc/sudoers, and put down the company's one.
>
> However, when I install it, I get:file /etc/sudoers from install of
> sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package
> sudo-1.7.2p1
>
> There are two ways around it that I know:
>
> 1. Put the file down as /etc/sudoers.companyname, and mv it in the %post
> 2. Unpackage sudo, modify, and re-package.
>
> I prefer not to do 2, as that will require keeping a close eye on the
> security errata of the package, and repackaging every time a new
> version is released. I'd rather keep the upstream package untouched,
> and just apply my config over the top.
>
> 1 works fine - however, it breaks the rpm -V functionality, which in
> my eyes is a big plus point for using RPMs.
>
> Installing with --replacefiles will work - however - however, I want
> to deploy the package with Puppet, and it doesn't seem to allow
> specifying that.
>
> Is there a way to create the RPM in such a way that --replacefiles is
> "built-in" to the RPM?
> Is there any other way of doing this - so that rpm -V works?
>
> Calum
>
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:50 AM
Niels de Vos
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

On 05/20/2011 09:37 AM, Calum wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I am rolling my own RPM to provide the correct sudoers config for the
> company where I'm working.
>
> I want it to archive the existing /etc/sudoers, and put down the company's one.

Can you not just put the needed config under /etc/sudoers.d/ ?
I guess that's why that directory exists

Cheers,
Niels


> However, when I install it, I get:file /etc/sudoers from install of
> sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package
> sudo-1.7.2p1
>
> There are two ways around it that I know:
>
> 1. Put the file down as /etc/sudoers.companyname, and mv it in the %post
> 2. Unpackage sudo, modify, and re-package.
>
> I prefer not to do 2, as that will require keeping a close eye on the
> security errata of the package, and repackaging every time a new
> version is released. I'd rather keep the upstream package untouched,
> and just apply my config over the top.
>
> 1 works fine - however, it breaks the rpm -V functionality, which in
> my eyes is a big plus point for using RPMs.
>
> Installing with --replacefiles will work - however - however, I want
> to deploy the package with Puppet, and it doesn't seem to allow
> specifying that.
>
> Is there a way to create the RPM in such a way that --replacefiles is
> "built-in" to the RPM?
> Is there any other way of doing this - so that rpm -V works?
>
> Calum
> --
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:53 AM
Calum
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

On 20 May 2011 09:50, Niels de Vos <devos@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Can you not just put the needed config under /etc/sudoers.d/ ?
> I guess that's why that directory exists

Indeed - but first I a:, need to Require sudo >=1.7.1 (for the
#includedir directive), and b:, I need to put down a base
/etc/sudoers, as the systems have varied /etc/sudoers currently.

This question applies for many other packages though - Samba, SNMP,
etc - they all require custom configs, and they don't all have the
ability to use .d files.
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:54 AM
Athmane Madjoudj
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

AFAIK, the list for general RPM question is:

http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

Also you might find the following presentation useful:

http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2010/presentations/summit/opensource-for-it-leaders/thurs/pwaterma-2-rpm/RPM-ifying-System-Configurations.pdf

On 05/20/2011 09:47 AM, Calum wrote:
> Hello - just noticed the scope of this list:
> "This mailing list provides a discussion forum for RPM packaging
> standards and practices for Fedora."
>
> Apologies for the post - I think I Googled for rpm mailinglist, and
> ended up here.
>
> Still, does anyone know the answer....?
>
> Living in hope,
> Calum
>
> On 20 May 2011 09:37, Calum<caluml@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I am rolling my own RPM to provide the correct sudoers config for the
>> company where I'm working.
>>
>> I want it to archive the existing /etc/sudoers, and put down the company's one.
>>
>> However, when I install it, I get:file /etc/sudoers from install of
>> sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package
>> sudo-1.7.2p1
>>
>> There are two ways around it that I know:
>>
>> 1. Put the file down as /etc/sudoers.companyname, and mv it in the %post
>> 2. Unpackage sudo, modify, and re-package.
>>
>> I prefer not to do 2, as that will require keeping a close eye on the
>> security errata of the package, and repackaging every time a new
>> version is released. I'd rather keep the upstream package untouched,
>> and just apply my config over the top.
>>
>> 1 works fine - however, it breaks the rpm -V functionality, which in
>> my eyes is a big plus point for using RPMs.
>>
>> Installing with --replacefiles will work - however - however, I want
>> to deploy the package with Puppet, and it doesn't seem to allow
>> specifying that.
>>
>> Is there a way to create the RPM in such a way that --replacefiles is
>> "built-in" to the RPM?
>> Is there any other way of doing this - so that rpm -V works?
>>
>> Calum
>>
> --
> packaging mailing list
> packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging


--
Athmane Madjoudj
RHCE
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 08:57 AM
Calum
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

On 20 May 2011 09:54, Athmane Madjoudj <athmanem@gmail.com> wrote:
> AFAIK, the list for general RPM question is:
>
> http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

Yes, I've just found that - I was led astray because on their own
site, they reference the no-longer-working redhat.com mailing list.

> Also you might find the following presentation useful:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2010/presentations/summit/opensource-for-it-leaders/thurs/pwaterma-2-rpm/RPM-ifying-System-Configurations.pdf

I shall take a look at that - many thanks.

Calum
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 
Old 05-20-2011, 09:11 AM
Calum
 
Default file /etc/sudoers from install of sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package sudo-1.7.2p1

On 20 May 2011 09:54, Athmane Madjoudj <athmanem@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also you might find the following presentation useful:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/2010/presentations/summit/opensource-for-it-leaders/thurs/pwaterma-2-rpm/RPM-ifying-System-Configurations.pdf

That's a very nice solution - it will probably work for lots of the
configs needed.
Unfortunately, sudo doesn't like symlinks

[root@uktest-lnx02 etc]# ls -l /etc/sudoers*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 May 20 09:05 /etc/sudoers -> sudoers.company
-r--r----- 1 root root 337 May 20 08:30 /etc/sudoers.company
[root@uktest-lnx02 etc]# sudo -l
sudo: /etc/sudoers is not a regular file
sudo: no valid sudoers sources found, quitting
[root@uktest-lnx02 etc]#


To my mind the ideal solution would be:

%files
%config(forcereplace) %attr(440, root, root) /etc/sudoers

But as the presentation points out, both sudo and sudo-config would
then "own" /etc/sudoers.
What is the problem with that, exactly btw? When a new version of sudo
was installed, it would overwrite the modified one, presumably.

%config(stealfilefromotherpackage) maybe...?

Calum
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:24 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org