There were some things I needed to fix. Here are the changes.
* Fixing mediatomb-daemon.postrm to delete /var/lib/mediatomb when removing
or purging.
* Adding dpkg-statoverride command during purging to remove overrides used
by mediatomb-daemon package.
- URL: http
On Nov 9, 2007 2:46 PM, Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 02:26:42PM -0500, Andres Mejia wrote:
> > Thanks for the suggestions. I went ahead and made the changes. Here's
> > the changelog for 0.10.0-5 of this package.
> >
> >[ Andres Mejia ]
> >* Using delus
> > > > On Nov 9, 2007 9:43 AM, Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 09:35:05AM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > > > > postinst should use dpkg-statoverride instead of chown
> > > &
ote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 09:35:05AM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > > > postinst should use dpkg-statoverride instead of chown
> > > > Really? I thought this was an administrator's tool, and the postinst
> > > > should
e:
> > > > postinst should use dpkg-statoverride instead of chown
> > > Really? I thought this was an administrator's tool, and the postinst
> > > should do something like
> >
> > I guess I meant "chowning blindly" instead of "chown".
On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 10:35:00AM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Nov 9, 2007 9:43 AM, Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 09, 2007 at 09:35:05AM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > postinst should use dpkg-statoverride instead of chown
> &g
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 09:52:52PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> One method is jackd/ jackstart. jackd runs as root, jackstart starts it,
> and can be run as any user, and uses kernel "capabilities" to give jackd
> the required scheduling priority ("realitime").
Why on earth would a sound serve
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 09:52:52PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> One method is jackd/ jackstart. jackd runs as root, jackstart starts it,
> and can be run as any user, and uses kernel "capabilities" to give jackd
> the required scheduling priority ("realitime").
Why on earth would a sound serve
> > If it requires SUID root, then the package is almost certainly buggy.
> > Please use a privileged audio device user instead; I'm aware of no
^^
> > reason that audio software should need general root privileges.
>
> Sorry to not clarify earlier - it
> > If it requires SUID root, then the package is almost certainly buggy.
> > Please use a privileged audio device user instead; I'm aware of no
^^
> > reason that audio software should need general root privileges.
>
> Sorry to not clarify earlier - it
his regard - eg., having an audio group,
> and suid/sgid on these applications?
> (seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
I invite you to join debian-multimedia mailing list, where
we are trying to coordinate jack related stuff.
regards,
junichi
his regard - eg., having an audio group,
> and suid/sgid on these applications?
> (seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
I invite you to join debian-multimedia mailing list, where
we are trying to coordinate jack related stuff.
regards,
junichi
--
To UNSUB
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 04:57:36PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > > > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > > > /usr/bin/jackstart
> > > [...]
> > > If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> > > dpkg-st
ould be the place to
> discuss "policy" in this regard - eg., having an audio group,
> and suid/sgid on these applications?
> (seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
We _do_ have an audio-group and users who need to have access to
/dev/{mixer,snd,dsp,..}
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 04:57:36PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > > > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > > > /usr/bin/jackstart
> > > [...]
> > > If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> > > dpkg-st
ould be the place to
> discuss "policy" in this regard - eg., having an audio group,
> and suid/sgid on these applications?
> (seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
We _do_ have an audio-group and users who need to have access to
/dev/{mixer,snd,dsp,..}
> > > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > > /usr/bin/jackstart
> > [...]
>
> > If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> > dpkg-statoverride but ship it SUID in the deb.
>
> If it requires SUID root, then the pa
> > > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > > /usr/bin/jackstart
> > [...]
>
> > If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> > dpkg-statoverride but ship it SUID in the deb.
>
> If it requires SUID root, then the pa
ftware
> > that requires "root" privileges set up:
> > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > /usr/bin/jackstart
> [...]
> If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> dpkg-statoverride but ship it SUID in the deb.
If it requires S
ftware
> > that requires "root" privileges set up:
> > dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
> > /usr/bin/jackstart
> [...]
> If jackstart always _requires_ SUID root you should not use
> dpkg-statoverride but ship it SUID in the deb.
If it requires S
and suid/sgid on these applications?
(seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
tia
zen
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 11:26:35PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Just been tinkering with jackstart and findout out what suid bit means.
> I think that the following would be a useful way to have audio software
> that requires "root" privileges set up:
>
> dpkg-statove
and suid/sgid on these applications?
(seeing as dpkg-statoverride is not the way to do it it seems)
tia
zen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 11:26:35PM +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Just been tinkering with jackstart and findout out what suid bit means.
> I think that the following would be a useful way to have audio software
> that requires "root" privileges set up:
>
> dpkg-statove
> Debian packaging policy
> (usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-files.html#s10.9) says to
> have root.root and rwxr-xr-w perms. But in this case I am thinking that
Should have read the whole page first... time for bed for me.
cheers
zen
Just been tinkering with jackstart and findout out what suid bit means.
I think that the following would be a useful way to have audio software
that requires "root" privileges set up:
dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
/usr/bin/jackstart
What this says is that each tim
> Debian packaging policy
> (usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html/ch-files.html#s10.9) says to
> have root.root and rwxr-xr-w perms. But in this case I am thinking that
Should have read the whole page first... time for bed for me.
cheers
zen
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wit
Just been tinkering with jackstart and findout out what suid bit means.
I think that the following would be a useful way to have audio software
that requires "root" privileges set up:
dpkg-statoverride --update --add root audio 4754 \
/usr/bin/jackstart
What this says is that each tim
ons in postinst
> > (allowing for the user to dpkg-statoverride them if they want).
>
> Assuming that the package will work with only a specific set of
> ownership and permissions, are there reasons for not letting the
> postinst do the statoverride?
You can do it either way. I find t
ons in postinst
> > (allowing for the user to dpkg-statoverride them if they want).
>
> Assuming that the package will work with only a specific set of
> ownership and permissions, are there reasons for not letting the
> postinst do the statoverride?
You can do it either way. I find t
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:01:07PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
>If the files need
> certain ownership on the installed system, set the permissions in postinst
> (allowing for the user to dpkg-statoverride them
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 09:01:07PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
>If the files need
> certain ownership on the installed system, set the permissions in postinst
> (allowing for the user to dpkg-statoverride them
On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 05:44:38PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:38:14 -0200
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> > > My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statover
> if I am not misunderstanding anything, no package needs to depend on
> dpkg as it is part of base am I wrong? (of course a versioned dependency
> is in order...)
>
close. No package needs to declare a depends on anything marked 'Essential',
these just happen to be in base. But so are many oth
On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:38:14 -0200
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> > My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> > Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
>
> No. A
On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 09:35:48AM -0200, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> Hi Mentors,
>
> My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
Please be certain that you are using it correctly; you should be vary
careful about do
On Fri, Jun 02, 2000 at 05:44:38PM -0300, Gustavo Noronha Silva wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:38:14 -0200
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> > > My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statover
> if I am not misunderstanding anything, no package needs to depend on
> dpkg as it is part of base am I wrong? (of course a versioned dependency
> is in order...)
>
close. No package needs to declare a depends on anything marked 'Essential',
these just happen to be in base. But so are many ot
On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 09:38:14 -0200
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> > My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> > Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
>
> No. A
On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 09:35:48AM -0200, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> Hi Mentors,
>
> My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
Please be certain that you are using it correctly; you should be vary
careful about do
On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
No. A simple versioned depends is enough. You only need pre-depends when you
use a package's programs in preinst.
--
&
Hi Mentors,
My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
Thanks,
Pedro
On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Pedro Zorzenon Neto wrote:
> My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
> Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
No. A simple versioned depends is enough. You only need pre-depends when you
use a package's programs in preinst.
--
&
Hi Mentors,
My package (avrprog) uses dpkg-statoverride in the postinst script.
Should I put a pre-depends on dpkg?
Thanks,
Pedro
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Everything is clear now.
Thanks a lot for these explanations.
--
Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Debian Activity Page:
http://jerome.marant.free.fr/debian
---
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.8.3.1
Severity: minor
On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 09:38:35AM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> This is an extract from dpkg-statoverride manpage:
>
>`stat overrides' are a way to tell dpkg to use a different
>owner or mode for a file
Everything is clear now.
Thanks a lot for these explanations.
--
Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Debian Activity Page:
http://jerome.marant.free.fr/debian
---
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subj
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.8.3.1
Severity: minor
On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 09:38:35AM +0100, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> This is an extract from dpkg-statoverride manpage:
>
>`stat overrides' are a way to tell dpkg to use a different
>owner or mode for a file
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, you shouldn't do it like this. You should do:
> dpkg-statoverride --list ..., examine the output to see if a specific
> mode/uid/gid is required, and if not, then just use a chmod. *Don't*
> use dpkg-statoverride --ad
Julian Gilbey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, you shouldn't do it like this. You should do:
> dpkg-statoverride --list ..., examine the output to see if a specific
> mode/uid/gid is required, and if not, then just use a chmod. *Don't*
> use dpkg-statoverride --ad
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:29:04PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now you are in the right mood to consider calling dpkg-statoverride
> *in spite* of what I have said before. Yes, just do a
> dpkg-statoverride --list ..., and if there is nothing already there, do a
> dpkg-statov
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:29:04PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Now you are in the right mood to consider calling dpkg-statoverride
> *in spite* of what I have said before. Yes, just do a
> dpkg-statoverride --list ..., and if there is nothing already there, do a
> dpkg-statov
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 10:38:37PM +0200, Michael-John Turner wrote:
> Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
> dpkg-statoverride
Look at the current ppp package (or do grep statoverride /var/lib/dpkg/info/*)
What I have read is that .deb makers dont use statov
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Michael-John Turner wrote:
> Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
> dpkg-statoverride for managing suid/sgid binaries owned by users created
> during the package's postinst? I'm looking for the 'correct' way of
Yes, p
Hi all
Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
dpkg-statoverride for managing suid/sgid binaries owned by users created
during the package's postinst? I'm looking for the 'correct' way of
handling a situation where I need to create a user and make bi
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 10:38:37PM +0200, Michael-John Turner wrote:
> Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
> dpkg-statoverride
Look at the current ppp package (or do grep statoverride /var/lib/dpkg/info/*)
What I have read is that .deb makers dont use statov
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Michael-John Turner wrote:
> Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
> dpkg-statoverride for managing suid/sgid binaries owned by users created
> during the package's postinst? I'm looking for the 'correct' way of
Yes, p
Hi all
Does anyone know of any packages that have been updated to use
dpkg-statoverride for managing suid/sgid binaries owned by users created
during the package's postinst? I'm looking for the 'correct' way of
handling a situation where I need to create a user and make bi
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:52:31AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Drew Parsons wrote:
> > Anyway, I tried also using dpkg-statoverride in postinst to set the mode for
> > /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic, not just /var/lib... and do get the same
> > problem:
> >
> > war
On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 11:52:31AM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> Drew Parsons wrote:
> > Anyway, I tried also using dpkg-statoverride in postinst to set the mode for
> > /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic, not just /var/lib... and do get the same problem:
> >
> > warning: --upda
Drew Parsons wrote:
> Anyway, I tried also using dpkg-statoverride in postinst to set the mode for
> /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic, not just /var/lib... and do get the same problem:
>
> warning: --update given but /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic does not exist
>
> So does that mea
Drew Parsons wrote:
> Anyway, I tried also using dpkg-statoverride in postinst to set the mode for
> /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic, not just /var/lib... and do get the same problem:
>
> warning: --update given but /usr/lib/games/mirrormagic does not exist
>
> So does that mea
On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 08:25:31AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:02:16PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> > their normal settings.
>
> But that doesn't explain why it says t
On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 08:25:31AM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:02:16PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> > their normal settings.
>
> But that doesn't explain why it says t
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:02:16PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> their normal settings.
But that doesn't explain why it says the directory doesn't exist..
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 12:02:16PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> their normal settings.
But that doesn't explain why it says the directory doesn't exist..
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
s.
>
> If it needs it, that's how it should be in the .deb. Make sure that
> dh_fixperms doesn't break it, though!
>
> dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> their normal settings.
>
Fair enough. That makes it simple enough the
s.
>
> If it needs it, that's how it should be in the .deb. Make sure that
> dh_fixperms doesn't break it, though!
>
> dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
> their normal settings.
>
Fair enough. That makes it simple enough the
sn't break it, though!
dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
their normal settings.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debi
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:12:48PM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Now when I do this by hand in debian/rules, it all works just fine. But I
> was given to understand that setting gid mode was better done using
> dpkg-statoverride for security reasons in the postinst script, using
> so
I have a question about dpkg-statoverride. I won't submit a bug, since maybe
I'm just trying to use it improperly, but as far as I can tell, it sucks
badly.
I'm packaging the new version of mirrormagic, which has a series of data
directories all with the setgid bit set (mode g+s)
sn't break it, though!
dpkg-statoverride is only for the sysadmin to change things *from*
their normal settings.
Julian
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
Debi
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:12:48PM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Now when I do this by hand in debian/rules, it all works just fine. But I
> was given to understand that setting gid mode was better done using
> dpkg-statoverride for security reasons in the postinst script, using
> so
I have a question about dpkg-statoverride. I won't submit a bug, since maybe
I'm just trying to use it improperly, but as far as I can tell, it sucks
badly.
I'm packaging the new version of mirrormagic, which has a series of data
directories all with the setgid bit set (mode g+s)
Joey Hess:
> Hmm. If you run chrmod in the postinst, you will clobber any different
> permissions that the user has set with statoverride.
Well, I remove the statoverride (previously suidmanager stuff) in the postrm
as well, so I need to re-instate them there.
> I think it may work t
Joey Hess:
> Hmm. If you run chrmod in the postinst, you will clobber any different
> permissions that the user has set with statoverride.
Well, I remove the statoverride (previously suidmanager stuff) in the postrm
as well, so I need to re-instate them there.
> I think it may work t
ostinst, and just remove the
> calls I have to suidmanager.
Hmm. If you run chrmod in the postinst, you will clobber any different
permissions that the user has set with statoverride.
I think it may work to examine dpkg-statoverride --list file, and if a
statoverride is set, do nothing, els
in postinst, and just remove the
> calls I have to suidmanager.
Hmm. If you run chrmod in the postinst, you will clobber any different
permissions that the user has set with statoverride.
I think it may work to examine dpkg-statoverride --list file, and if a
statoverride is set, do nothing, els
Joey Hess:
> There is one wrinkle: If your package previously used suidmanager, and
> you convert it to not, you should make it Conflicts: suidmanager (<< 0.50).
> (The details of why are a little messy; see earlier discussion on
> debian-devel.)
A program I packaged (jwhois, I am taking over mai
Joey Hess:
> There is one wrinkle: If your package previously used suidmanager, and
> you convert it to not, you should make it Conflicts: suidmanager (<< 0.50).
> (The details of why are a little messy; see earlier discussion on
> debian-devel.)
A program I packaged (jwhois, I am taking over ma
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 04:54:33PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> Wichert says he will have a postinst script that converts suid.conf over
> to statoverride format. It seems to me that the best way to convert is to
> simply remove the calls to suidmanager in your install scripts. I
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 04:54:33PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> Wichert says he will have a postinst script that converts suid.conf over
> to statoverride format. It seems to me that the best way to convert is to
> simply remove the calls to suidmanager in your install scripts. I
Ben Collins wrote:
> Wichert says he will have a postinst script that converts suid.conf over
> to statoverride format. It seems to me that the best way to convert is to
> simply remove the calls to suidmanager in your install scripts. If you
> user debhelper and currently depend on
Ben Collins wrote:
> Wichert says he will have a postinst script that converts suid.conf over
> to statoverride format. It seems to me that the best way to convert is to
> simply remove the calls to suidmanager in your install scripts. If you
> user debhelper and currently depend on
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 10:10:21PM +0100, peter karlsson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> So, am I supposed to move over my packages from using suidmanager to
> use the new dpkg-statoverride? If so, is there a HOWTO describing how
> to do it somewhere?
Well, the dpkg-statoverride tool basically w
Hi!
So, am I supposed to move over my packages from using suidmanager to
use the new dpkg-statoverride? If so, is there a HOWTO describing how
to do it somewhere?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 10:10:21PM +0100, peter karlsson wrote:
> Hi!
>
> So, am I supposed to move over my packages from using suidmanager to
> use the new dpkg-statoverride? If so, is there a HOWTO describing how
> to do it somewhere?
Well, the dpkg-statoverride tool basica
Hi!
So, am I supposed to move over my packages from using suidmanager to
use the new dpkg-statoverride? If so, is there a HOWTO describing how
to do it somewhere?
--
\\//
peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law:
http
88 matches
Mail list logo
