I've talked with Frank and he will remove the limits change. --Alex
> -----Original Message----- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 4:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ASF40][QA] AWSAPI packging remarks > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Frank Zhang <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Not being a packaging guy, I don't have a strong opinion about this issue. > >> However, is the consensus that we have enough of a problem here that > >> it needs to be addressed prior to a release? > > > > Personally I think it needn't. > > And I even think awsapi should be a separate project, though this is > > little off topic > > Thanks Frank... > > Any other opinions? > > Anyone want to take a crack at resolving the AWS API packaging issue? > > >> > >> - chip > >> > >> On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:04 PM, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Frank Zhang > >> > <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Hi, > >> >>> > >> >>> Edison asked me last Friday if I could take a look at applying > >> >>> this commit for Debian as well: > >> >>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator- > >> >>> > >> > cloudstack.git;a=commitdiff;h=595ab41de6bee4115300c046c17628934cb4a3 > >> >>> 5 > >> >>> a > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm looking into this right now and I noticed we don't even > >> >>> package the AWSAPI files for Debian? I didn't notice since I > >> >>> never worked with this API before. > >> >>> > >> >>> I checked out the cloud.spec file and I noticed: > >> >>> > >> >>> %pre aws-api > >> >>> id %{name} > /dev/null 2>&1 || /usr/sbin/useradd -M -c > >> >>> "CloudStack unprivileged user" \ > >> >>> -r -s /bin/sh -d %{_sharedstatedir}/%{name}/management > >> >>> %{name}|| true > >> >>> > >> >>> # set max file descriptors for cloud user to 4096 sed -i /"cloud > >> >>> hard nofile"/d /etc/security/limits.conf sed -i /"cloud soft > >> >>> nofile"/d /etc/security/limits.conf echo "cloud hard nofile 4096" > >> >>> >> /etc/security/limits.conf echo "cloud soft nofile 4096" >> > >> >>> /etc/security/limits.conf rm - rf %{_localstatedir}/cache/%{name} > >> >>> # user harcoded here, also hardcoded on wscript > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Here we have a RPM package touching the "limits.conf" file on a > >> >>> system without notifying the sysadmin? What if this file was > >> >>> managed by for example Puppet? > >> >>> > >> >>> Imho we should _not_ these files but add a remark to the > >> >>> documentation or throw a warning somewhere. > >> >>> > >> >>> I'll start packaging the AWSAPI files for Debian, but I'm not > >> >>> planning on adding this to any postinst/preinst files for the > >> >>> Debian > >> packages. > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm assuming this is some sort of legacy from the past somewhere? > >> >>> > >> >>> One question remains though: How come that QA never picked up > >> >>> that there is no Debian packaging at all for AWSAPI? Or did I miss > >> >>> this? > >> >>> > >> >>> I found CLOUDSTACK-257, but that doesn't seem to mention anything > >> >>> about Debian or Ubuntu? > >> >> > >> >> The way packaging AWSAPI is definitely wrong, it's there only > >> >> because the tight schedule forced me to use this dirty hack at that > moment. > >> >> > >> >> %pre %post should never be used to install files as any changes in > >> >> these sections are out of control RPM system, it will leave stale > >> >> data in > >> system when doing "rpm -e" or "yum erase". > >> >> > >> >> So for Debian please forget these nasty hooks, just package them > >> >> as what > >> we do normally for packaging. > >> > > >> > > >> > We shouldn't be in such a rush that we have nasty hacks. > >> > Lets fix it properly. > >> > I am also concerned about the symlinks we create in %post for awsapi. > >> > Lets fix those both. > >> > > >> > --David > >> > > >
