On Wed, 03 Feb 2010, Brandon wrote: > First, I suggest that Debian Policy require, or at least recommend, > that packages not use dpkg-statoverride to set permissions for files > with static uids and gids. In other words, if it is possible for the > maintainer to set the permissions in the package binary itself, then > he should.
What is the rationale for this? What set of packages currently existing would be instantly buggy if this were the case? > As for setting permissions for files with dynamic ids, debian policy > says that dpkg-statoverride is necessary. This is not true, or at > least misleading. Certainly the post install script should check to > make sure that there isn't any override in place before setting file > permissions, but I think it would be better to set permissions with > chown and chmod than dpkg-statoverride. This is a bad idea. There's no advantage to using chown and chmod over dpkg-statoverride. In fact, you have to do more work, because you have to check all of the things that dpkg-statoverride gets you for free, like making sure that dpkg-statoverride hasn't previously been set. It also means that there will be a relatively long time when the package has been unpacked with the wrong permissions set until the postinst is called to fix them up. Don Armstrong -- Who is thinking this? I am. -- Greg Egan _Diaspora_ p38 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
