Re: [Rpm-maint] ACL and File Capability Support in RPM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Panu, The following change looks a little problematic: http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=blobdiff;f=lib/verify.c;h=69fcd162a02fbb43ade1b6635e2f651ff43a9e8e;hp=4658ce99367b6820772554ca90887bf2a3ab026e;hb=db1f9af5e2a4443e64ce10112a9553204bab7f4e;hpb=97ab15cc9eadc1aab563b87a0c92d559cd9e9a41 Specifically, cap_size() refers only to the cap_copy_ext() size of the capability set and not the sizeof(*cap_t), so the memory comparison: memcmp(cap, fcap, cap_size(cap) is not reliably comparing the capability sets - at best this comparison is fragile. Cheers Andrew Panu Matilainen wrote: On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Panu Matilainen wrote: I added the initial bits to rpm.org HEAD yesterday, essentially Andreas' patch except using libcap instead of looking at file xattr info. I intend to implement + add the rest fairly soon. ...and the rest is committed to rpm.org HEAD now. Might be missing some corner cases and odd bits but the basics work: - spec filelist now accepts %caps(capabilities) and stores in headers - install/upgrade set capabilities on filesystem - verification is updated to match with the above - Panu - -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJCdm0+bHCR3gb8jsRAj1tAJ9xgGdiE9DsJQGRejejU9qrCFb/rgCdGP1Y TECIvIFcVOPJhb4grLcmwpc= =ql9P -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] ACL and File Capability Support in RPM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Panu Matilainen wrote: On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, Andrew G. Morgan wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Panu, The following change looks a little problematic: http://rpm.org/gitweb?p=rpm.git;a=blobdiff;f=lib/verify.c;h=69fcd162a02fbb43ade1b6635e2f651ff43a9e8e;hp=4658ce99367b6820772554ca90887bf2a3ab026e;hb=db1f9af5e2a4443e64ce10112a9553204bab7f4e;hpb=97ab15cc9eadc1aab563b87a0c92d559cd9e9a41 Specifically, cap_size() refers only to the cap_copy_ext() size of the capability set and not the sizeof(*cap_t), so the memory comparison: memcmp(cap, fcap, cap_size(cap) is not reliably comparing the capability sets - at best this comparison is fragile. Oops... thanks for pointing this out. So assuming I can't rely on cap_compare() always being there (it being Linux-specific extension and even then only in very recent libcap), would the following be a reasonable fallback: If cap_size() of both sets are equal, grab external presentation of both and memcmp() them? Yes, that would work - if their size is different they don't match ;-) Cheers Andrew -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJCgAG+bHCR3gb8jsRAgmlAKCd1UQ/Xs+9thRfRGp9OohyB0OIxgCg1XzO SHp9mfC5yiI2YptShOg8u7Y= =8FGc -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
[Rpm-maint] unexpected file conflict behavior
Hi, Good day. Recently I had a weird situation where I can install two rpms together (in one line) without any errors but once I install them one after the other, I got a file conflict errors. When looking closedly, the files that complain about conflicting are actually owned by both packages. Can anyone please shed some lights on me why installing them together will work? (I actually expect to see file conflict error there too). Thanks in advance. # rpm -ivh libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2.ppc.rpm Preparing... ### [100%] 1:libstdc++-devel ### [100%] # rpm -ivh libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2.ppc64.rpm Preparing... ### [100%] file /usr/include/c++/3.4.3/ppc64-redhat-linux/bits/stdc++.h.gch/O0g from install of libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 conflicts with file from package libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 file /usr/include/c++/3.4.3/ppc64-redhat-linux/bits/stdc++.h.gch/O2g from install of libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 conflicts with file from package libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 # rpm -qa | grep libstdc++-devel | xargs rpm -e --allmatches --nodeps # rpm -ivh libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2.ppc64.rpm libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2.ppc.rpm Preparing... ### [100%] 1:libstdc++-devel ### [ 50%] 2:libstdc++-devel ### [100%] # rpm -qf /usr/include/c++/3.4.3/ppc64-redhat-linux/bits/stdc++.h.gch/O0g libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 libstdc++-devel-3.4.4-2 # rpm --version RPM version 4.3.3 Regards, --- Steven ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
Re: [Rpm-maint] unexpected file conflict behavior
steven chen wrote: Hi, Good day. Recently I had a weird situation where I can install two rpms together (in one line) without any errors but once I install them one after the other, I got a file conflict errors. When looking closedly, the files that complain about conflicting are actually owned by both packages. Can anyone please shed some lights on me why installing them together will work? (I actually expect to see file conflict error there too). Thanks in advance. To fix that file conflict the files in the both packages need to be exactly the same (md5, owner, group, ...). As this is sometimes difficult to achieve for a multilib situation (as this) this test was lowered in the dark ages so that at least most installations will somehow work. This is of course nonsense and has already be changed back in rpm upstream (=4.6). So not issuing an file conflict is an (already fixed) bug in rpm. While some of these multilib file conflicts are packaging bugs it is also possible that this conflict just tells you to install only one architecture of this devel package. Florian ___ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
