Packaging talk:Tmpfiles.d

From FedoraProject

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with 'It should be noted that the manpage should be read carefully if what is intended to do is anything more than just creating top-level directories in <code>/var/run</code> or <code...')
 
(Answer to last question found.)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:
  
 
--[[User:Vonbrand|Vonbrand]] 16:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Vonbrand|Vonbrand]] 16:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 +
 +
I wasn't clear whether directories specified in tmpfiles.d conf files ought to be packaged in the manifest as normal, with %ghost, or not at all. This statement clears it up: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/525
 +
The directories ought to be packaged as normal.
 +
 +
--[[User:Twaugh|Tim Waugh]] 09:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 09:38, 27 November 2013

It should be noted that the manpage should be read carefully if what is intended to do is anything more than just creating top-level directories in /var/run or /var/lock. For instance, pki-ca-9.0.5-1.fc15.noarch, pki-kra-9.0.2-1.fc15.noarch, and pki-ocsp-9.0.1-1.fc15.noarch (at least) do something in the line (example from pki-ca):

D /var/lock/pki 0755 root root -
D /var/lock/pki/ca 0755 root root -
D /var/run/pki 0755 root root -
D /var/run/pki/ca 0755 root root -

As each of the three specify cleaning out the /var/run/pki directory, the result probably won't be what is expected...

--Vonbrand 16:22, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't clear whether directories specified in tmpfiles.d conf files ought to be packaged in the manifest as normal, with %ghost, or not at all. This statement clears it up: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/525 The directories ought to be packaged as normal.

--Tim Waugh 09:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)