On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 20:51:00 +0200, Marc Haber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
>daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
>that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
>- of course - fail
On Sun, 08 Jun 2003 20:51:00 +0200, Marc Haber
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
>daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
>that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
>- of course - fail
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 12:49:50PM -0400, Ed McMan wrote:
> Monday, June 9, 2003, 3:30:11 AM, debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
> (debian-mentors) wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Well, you could do the chown at install time inside
Monday, June 9, 2003, 3:30:11 AM, debian-mentors@lists.debian.org
(debian-mentors) wrote:
Marc> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
Marc> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That
>>should
>>solve the problem nicely.
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 12:49:50PM -0400, Ed McMan wrote:
> Monday, June 9, 2003, 3:30:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (debian-mentors) wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst.
Monday, June 9, 2003, 3:30:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (debian-mentors) wrote:
Marc> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
Marc> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That should
>>solve the problem nicely.
Marc> Which is wh
Hi.
Marc Haber wrote:
> It is acceptable to add code testing for account presence and not
> chowning if the account is not present? That way, I would be able to
> give back patches to upstream.
I tend to agree with Colin's comment. How about asking upstream to provide an
option to specify whether
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:37:10AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 21:01:07 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >In either case, just disable whatever code is doing this.
>
> It is acceptable to add code testing for account presence and not
> chowning if the account
Hi Marc!
You wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That
> >should
> >solve the problem nicely.
>
> Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:30:11AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
> the account not present. I am very unsure about handling this.
Just kill the parts of the Makefile that insist on the chowning, and
after adding the user in postin
Hi.
Marc Haber wrote:
> It is acceptable to add code testing for account presence and not
> chowning if the account is not present? That way, I would be able to
> give back patches to upstream.
I tend to agree with Colin's comment. How about asking upstream to provide an
option to specify whether
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 21:01:07 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:51:00PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> How am I supposed to handle this? Shall I change the build mechanisms
>> so that the account is not needed at build time, shall I pester
>> upstream to have t
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That should
>solve the problem nicely.
Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
the account not present. I am very un
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:37:10AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 21:01:07 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >In either case, just disable whatever code is doing this.
>
> It is acceptable to add code testing for account presence and not
> chowning if the account
Hi Marc!
You wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That should
> >solve the problem nicely.
>
> Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
> t
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 09:30:11AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
> the account not present. I am very unsure about handling this.
Just kill the parts of the Makefile that insist on the chowning, and
after adding the user in postin
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 21:01:07 -0400, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:51:00PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> How am I supposed to handle this? Shall I change the build mechanisms
>> so that the account is not needed at build time, shall I pester
>> upstream to have t
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 15:11:59 -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, you could do the chown at install time inside the postinst. That should
>solve the problem nicely.
Which is what my package already does, but it does not even build with
the account not present. I am very un
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:51:00PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when th
Marc Haber wrote:
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when the rrfw account does not exist at build
> ti
On Sun, Jun 08, 2003 at 08:51:00PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when th
Marc Haber wrote:
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when the rrfw account does not exist at build
> ti
On Sunday 08 June 2003 11:51, Marc Haber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when the rrf
On Sunday 08 June 2003 11:51, Marc Haber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
> daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
> that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
> - of course - fails when the rrf
Marc Haber wrote:
> How am I supposed to handle this? Shall I change the build mechanisms
> so that the account is not needed at build time, shall I pester
> upstream to have that changed, or is there a workaround available?
IMHO the best solution would be involving the upstream. (This is, of cours
Hi,
I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
- of course - fails when the rrfw account does not exist at build
time.
How am I supposed
Marc Haber wrote:
> How am I supposed to handle this? Shall I change the build mechanisms
> so that the account is not needed at build time, shall I pester
> upstream to have that changed, or is there a workaround available?
IMHO the best solution would be involving the upstream. (This is, of cours
Hi,
I am currently preparing packages for rrfw (see bug#186828). The
daemons that come with rrfw run as user rrfw, and the Makefiles of
that package insist on chowning some files to rrfw at build time. That
- of course - fails when the rrfw account does not exist at build
time.
How am I supposed
28 matches
Mail list logo
