On Sunday 07 Aug 2011 16:20:18 Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 07.08.2011 02:22, schrieb Mick:
> > On Friday 05 Aug 2011 23:08:38 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> >> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 17:59:00 +0200, Florian Philipp wrote:
> >>> Yes, this was introduced in 3.8.0 to fix security issues [1]. Change
> >>> your config to look like this:
> >>> /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log {
> >>> su portage portage
> >>> ...
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> Disclaimer: I've not really tried this (yet) but I think I'm able to
> >>> read changelogs and man-pages. ;-)
> >>
> >> Yes that fixes it. The latest portage ebuilds include an updated config
> >> file.
> >
> > Hmm ... it still complains here!
> >
> > error: error setting owner of
> > /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log-20110801.gz: Operation not permitted
> >
> >
> > This is my /etc/logrotate.d/elog-save-summary:
> > ===================================
> > /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log {
> >
> > su portage portage
> >
> > missingok
> > nocreate
> > delaycompress
> >
> > }
> > ===================================
> >
> > # ls -la /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log
> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 root portage 4326 Aug 6 09:44
> > /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log
> >
> > Can you see anything amiss?
>
> At least on my system, /var/log/portage has the following permissions:
> drwxr-xr-x root root
>
> Only root can write, therefore the config must read
>
> /var/log/portage/elog/summary.log {
> su root portage
> missingok
> nocreate
> delaycompress
> }
>
> Hope this helps,
> Florian PhilippThanks for this Florian, It is interesting that two of my machines actually are set up like this: drwxrws--- 2 portage portage 240 Aug 9 21:07 elog and /var/log/portage is also set up like this: drwxrws--- 4 portage portage 7152 Aug 7 18:04 portage However, I can't remember if I set it up like that myself (these are old machines). The latest and newest installation on a third box looks just like yours. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
