Re: [gentoo-dev] Sanity check: enewuser in binpkg with portage-utils

On 2017-07-20 19:17, Michał Górny wrote: > No. This is entirely wrong and insane. Tar stores user and group > names, and restores them correctly. Oops, thanks for correction. -- Regards, Thomas signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Sanity check: enewuser in binpkg with portage-utils

Dnia 20 lipca 2017 18:15:00 CEST, Thomas Deutschmann napisał(a): >Hi, > >keep in mind that when installing a binpkg, src_* functions are >skipped, >see https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/functions/ > >So when you are doing anything with the actual user, you have to do

Re: [gentoo-dev] Sanity check: enewuser in binpkg with portage-utils

Hi, keep in mind that when installing a binpkg, src_* functions are skipped, see https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/functions/ So when you are doing anything with the actual user, you have to do that in a pkg_* function. In case of "exeopts", if you do something like exeopts -m 6710

[gentoo-dev] Sanity check: enewuser in binpkg with portage-utils

Hi, I have some ebuilds which use enewuser to create groups and users in pkg_setup(), and make use of those groups and users in src_install() in exeopts, insopts etc. Is there any reason that this would not always work reliably with binpkgs? Ie. regardless of whether I am using portage or