Tom Mueller wrote:
Tom Mueller wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
Tom Mueller (plain-text) wrote:
pkg(1) now prints a message and returns 1. However, for a user
image where the user is unable to change the ownership of a file
anyway, not having the required user/group is ignored.
I don't agree with the assumption that a user image automatically
implies that a user doesn't have the permissions to change ownership
of a file.
With the change, the Image class has a "can_change_file_ownership"
method that tests to see if the user running the command actually has
the ability to change file ownership within the image. This test is
only done for non-ENTIRE images. Only if it is a non-ENTIRE image AND
the user cannot change file ownership of a temporary file are invalid
owner/group tags ignored.
AFAIK, I'm not making the assumption that you don't agree with.
One other point. Before this change, we were already ignoring the
inability to change the ownership of files in a user image. For
example, if a file action says the file is to be owned by root, but the
user running the install is unable to change a file to root, pkg(5)
silently ignores this error and the file is owned by the user. In the
long term, this behavior should be changed by making the owner/group
tags optional on file and dir actions.
This change just provides parity for unknown users and group for that
case rather than throwing an exception. And for the user with the
ability to change file ownership, it is now reported as an error rather
than throwing a traceback as it did before.
If you haven't made things any worse, then I can't complain too much.
But I don't like silently ignoring the error either :/
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
