Summary: build: add /usr/bin/killall to sudoers list in rpm spec [#451]
Review request for Trac Ticket(s): #451
Peer Reviewer(s): Anders Widell
Pull request to: <<LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE>>
Affected branch(es): <<LIST ALL AFFECTED BRANCH(ES)>>
Development branch: <<IF ANY GIVE THE REPO URL>>
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests n
Other n
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
changeset 007921b03a9237f73d59c779d3feb559d39c72b8
Author: mathi.naic...@oracle.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:42:53 +0530
build: add /usr/bin/killall to sudoers list in rpm spec [#451] amfwd
uses
the killall program to send the ABRT signal to amfnd. This works if
amfwd is
running as root, but not if it is running as the opensaf user (since the
amfnd process is running as root even if amfwd is not). This patch adds
killall to the sudoers to the rpm spec.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
00-README.conf | 2 +-
opensaf.spec.in | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
1. Change watchdog to mimick generation of core by-default.
2. Build and install opensaf for the non-root 'opensaf' user.
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
Same as above. Without the patch, there will not be any core of amfnd.
With this patch, a core file of amfnd will get generated.
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
Ack from AndersW.
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 n n
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.hgrc file (i.e. username, email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your SQL database under version control now!
Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
