georges wrote: > I still tend to think the script being this prescriptive about existing > pkg conflicts for shared paths is not a good thing.
It is if you have a rogue package which tries to make /usr/sbin mode 777, for instance. > I think it would be cleaner to tolerate existing path perms/ownership > issues and bomb out only on new ones. It seems to me that once we GA the > effect on non-compliant repo's is essentially the same. Thing is, when you're upgrading the system, you get a lot of new ones -- in all the new package versions you're putting on the system. If we knew what the right perms were, then we could work around the issue pretty simply, but we don't know which is the canonical delivery. We do need to implement our scheme for default directory permissions sometime soon so that people can safely drop directories they don't "own" from their packages, but even now that's mostly correct. It's a shame we didn't put this checking in a long time ago and that we're just hitting this now, but we'll get over the hump, and soon enough it'll be a thing of the past. Danek _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
