Your message dated Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:39:31 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Closing bug fixed by upstream (was: Bug#315713: hrm)
has caused the Debian Bug report #315713,
regarding sudoedit - wrong gid of new files
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
immediately.)
--
315713: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=315713
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: sudo
Version: 1.6.8p7-1.1
Severity: normal
When sudoedit is invoked on a non-existent file, that file is created
with the gid of the invoking user, as can be seen in the following session:
$ ls -l /etc/nonexistent
ls: /etc/nonexistent: No such file or directory
$ sudoedit /etc/nonexistent
Password:
Waiting for Emacs...Done
$ ls -l /etc/nonexistent
-rw-r--r-- 1 root sven 2 Jun 25 07:58 /etc/nonexistent
$
This is probably not what most people want and unintentional, the gid
of the new file should be 0.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.31
Locale: LANG=de_DE, LC_CTYPE=de_DE (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Versions of packages sudo depends on:
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f
ii libpam0g 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
package: sudo
version: 1.6.9p6-1
On 2006-04-03 10:36 +0200, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 09:20 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> But it would be possible to get the desired gid from the /etc/passwd
>> file, for instance with getpwnam(3). I think it would be correct if
>> "sudoedit [-u user] newfile" results in the same gid for newfile as
>> "sudo [-u user] $EDITOR newfile". Do you agree to that?
>
> Yes, if we were to change the current behavior, that probably makes as
> much sense as anything.
This was implemented upstream in version 1.6.9p5, see comment 619 in the
upstream changelog. The diff for the fix is available available at
http://www.sudo.ws/cgi-bin/cvsweb/sudo/sudo_edit.c.diff?r1=1.6.2.7&r2=1.6.2.8.
Closing the bug,
Sven
--- End Message ---
