[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [coreutils] [patch] Re: Install enhancement request: capabilities

From: Pádraig Brady
Subject: Re: [coreutils] [patch] Re: Install enhancement request: capabilities
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 15:34:22 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3

On 09/11/10 14:56, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday, November 07, 2010 08:57:22 Yaron Sheffer wrote:
>> I still don't see the logic of not including capabilities in the
>> "install" feature set. We could use chmod and chown separately, too. But
>> still, setting owner/group and mode are a core functionality of this
>> utility. Similarly, if we think that POSIX capabilities are important
>> (see e.g., we
>> should make their use as easy and natural as possible. For me that means
>> at the minimum support in install, tar (and derived packaging tools) and
>> possibly ls.
> FWIW, it'd make my life easier as a distro maintainer as i wouldnt need to 
> force `setcap` on everyone ...
> -mike

Your experience in these matters certainly sways things.
I'd like to understand fully though before proceeding.

By forcing `setcap` on everyone, do you mean as a
build time package dependency, or does gentoo &/or dpkg
not support capabilities thus requiring it as an install time dep?

If a package needs capabilities, is this dep really an issue?

Could you expand on the failure modes you would expect.
I presume if one asks for capabilities we should error if they weren't set.
Would we need to verify like setcap -v?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]