On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 15:29 -0400, Jim Rees wrote: > The main problem I've had with putting system directories like /usr/bin in > afs is that when you go to install something it will fail because > chmod/chown will fail. >
I wonder if it would be inappropriate to make kerberos/afs principles in such a manner that chmod/chown would not fail. For example, in Gentoo, if the install process wanted to install a file to /usr/bin which was a symlink to an afs volume and then chown this file to the owner or group "portage" then I wonder if I made a kerberos user called portage whether that would be the best solution. It's not a carefully thought out solution, but just one that occurs to me. Anyone see any glaring flaws with that line of thinking? > One way around this is to install as root/admin but that scares me. I have > modified /usr/bin/install so that if chmod or chown fails, it pretends to > succeed, and that helps. > Ok. > A smaller problem is no cross-dir links, but that is usually only a problem > for man pages. > Not sure I follow. Could you explain? > Another way around this that works pretty well in large shops is to have a > template machine that you do all your installs on, then copy everything (via > something like rsync) into afs. > True, but if you have lots of different architectures then you really need lots of different template machines. Seems a waste... > After things are installed they usually just work. > True. > On the subject of Debian, in my limited experience apt-get/dpkg seems to > work much better than rpm. That mirrors my own. Thanks for your reply, Jim. -Kevin _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
