On Tue, Jul 10, 2007, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 of July 2007, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2007, Mark Hatle wrote:
> > > For something to software installs, I think it's reasonable to set the
> > > default umask instead of using the environment's.
> >
> > Yes, also my opinion. RPM is an installer and one expects more that it
> > operates on its stuff totally independent from the calling environment.
> > Setting at least umask in main() is reasonable IMHO.
>
> I agree.
>
> Unfortunately Jeff once disagreed about things like this. For
> example %post/%pre etc scripts are not run in clean stable enviroment -
> calling env is used instead.
Yes, that's the approach we use in OpenPKG, too. We actually use this
approach of a "sane environment" for all %xxxx scripts, including and
most notably %build and %install. Without this we many years ago we
resulted in many nice errors from users with umasks settings of 077 and
similar ;-)
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
