Problem with %attr/%defattr
Amol Kulkarni
amolk112k at gmail.com
Mon Oct 10 11:18:14 UTC 2011
Thanks Elia!
Exactly what I was looking for.
Ive put attr independently for each file - now it works.
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 5:30 PM, <rpm-list-request at lists.rpm.org> wrote:
> Send Rpm-list mailing list submissions to
> rpm-list at lists.rpm.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rpm-list-request at lists.rpm.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rpm-list-owner at lists.rpm.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Rpm-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Problem with %attr/%defattr (Amol Kulkarni)
> 2. Re: Problem with %attr/%defattr (Jos Vos)
> 3. Re: Problem with %attr/%defattr (devzero2000)
> 4. rpm: failed dependency even though the dso library is
> installed, but seems to not be "provided" (Jim Galarowicz)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 18:11:15 +0530
> From: Amol Kulkarni <amolk112k at gmail.com>
> To: rpm-list at lists.rpm.org
> Subject: Problem with %attr/%defattr
> Message-ID:
> <CABhJRgMW+_7ogzQPBbD7urRGow7VFTuR5hS3pccmFzFrMtvXug at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear All,
>
> I had built some RPMs for our product on RHEL4 ( rpm ver= rpm-4.3.3-26 ).
> Now I'm migrating these rpms to RHEL6 ( rpm ver = rpm-4.8.0-16 ).
>
> One of the rpms has files owned by different users.
>
> Eg. In qmail queue, "queue/remote" folder is owned by "qmails" user while
> "queue/todo" folder is owned by "qmailq" user.
>
> The qmail makefile creates the files with appropriate permissions and
> ownerships. There is no code to set the permissions/ownership in spec file.
>
> In RHEL4, rpm was automatically taking the file permissions set on the
> files
> during the build/compile phase. But in RHEL6, it is changing the ownership
> to root.root.
>
> My files section is :
>
> %files
> /var/qmail/bin
> /var/qmail/boot
> %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/control
> /var/qmail/doc
> /var/qmail/log
> /var/qmail/man
> %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/queue
> /var/qmail/users
> /var/qmail/rc
>
>
> After searching the net, I tried using %defattr(-,-,-,-) macro at global
> level and the %attr(-,-,-) macro per entry in the %files section. But to no
> avail.
>
> Can anybody point me in the right direction ?
>
> Thanks for all the help in advance.
> Amol.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/attachments/20111007/cfdcd442/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:57:17 +0200
> From: Jos Vos <jos at xos.nl>
> To: General discussion about the RPM package manager
> <rpm-list at lists.rpm.org>
> Subject: Re: Problem with %attr/%defattr
> Message-ID: <20111007125717.GA15842 at jasmine.xos.nl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 06:11:15PM +0530, Amol Kulkarni wrote:
>
> > The qmail makefile creates the files with appropriate permissions and
> > ownerships. There is no code to set the permissions/ownership in spec
> file.
>
> In %install a package should *never* set ownership of files, as you
> should be able to build the package as *any* user (building a package
> as root is almost a crime ;-)). If the Makefile does this, you should
> apply a patch in your package to avoid this.
>
> > In RHEL4, rpm was automatically taking the file permissions set on the
> files
> > during the build/compile phase. But in RHEL6, it is changing the
> ownership
> > to root.root.
> >
> > My files section is :
> >
> > %files
> > /var/qmail/bin
> > /var/qmail/boot
> > %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/control
> > /var/qmail/doc
> > /var/qmail/log
> > /var/qmail/man
> > %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/queue
> > /var/qmail/users
> > /var/qmail/rc
> >
> > After searching the net, I tried using %defattr(-,-,-,-) macro at global
> > level and the %attr(-,-,-) macro per entry in the %files section. But to
> no
> > avail.
>
> You don't need to use %defattr (defaults to -,root,root), but use %attr
> for the files/dirs that need a non-root owner/group, e.g.
>
> %attr(-,qmails,root) /var/qmail/queue/remote
> %attr(-,qmailq,root) /var/qmail/queue/remote
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> --
> -- Jos Vos <jos at xos.nl>
> -- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364
> -- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 15:59:00 +0200
> From: devzero2000 <pinto.elia at gmail.com>
> To: General discussion about the RPM package manager
> <rpm-list at lists.rpm.org>
> Subject: Re: Problem with %attr/%defattr
> Message-ID:
> <CAH5b-BVJU6ZQuDefybMYuj9HW1vJuXOabVP5yONXYst2ukfFaw at mail.gmail.com
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Amol Kulkarni <amolk112k at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I had built some RPMs for our product on RHEL4 ( rpm ver= rpm-4.3.3-26
> ).
> > Now I'm migrating these rpms to RHEL6 ( rpm ver = rpm-4.8.0-16 ).
> >
> > One of the rpms has files owned by different users.
> >
> > Eg. In qmail queue, "queue/remote" folder is owned by "qmails" user while
> > "queue/todo" folder is owned by "qmailq" user.
> >
> > The qmail makefile creates the files with appropriate permissions and
> > ownerships. There is no code to set the permissions/ownership in spec
> file.
> >
> > In RHEL4, rpm was automatically taking the file permissions set on the
> > files during the build/compile phase. But in RHEL6, it is changing the
> > ownership to root.root.
> >
> > My files section is :
> >
> > %files
> > /var/qmail/bin
> > /var/qmail/boot
> > %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/control
> > /var/qmail/doc
> > /var/qmail/log
> > /var/qmail/man
> > %config(noreplace) /var/qmail/queue
> > /var/qmail/users
> > /var/qmail/rc
> >
> >
> > After searching the net, I tried using %defattr(-,-,-,-) macro at global
> > level and the %attr(-,-,-) macro per entry in the %files section. But to
> no
> > avail.
> >
> > Can anybody point me in the right direction ?
> >
> > Thanks for all the help in advance.
> >
> In rpm 4.4 (Oct 31 2004) was introduced the "add default
> %defattr(-,root,root) for all packages". So the "problem" is not only in
> RHEL6 but also RHEL5 for example.
>
> IIUC you're basing your spec on a behavior later deemed incorrect. My
> advice, as already mentioned, is to use multiple %attr or use, if you have
> many file, multiple %defattr with the right perms and ownership.
>
>
> hth
>
> > Amol.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rpm-list mailing list
> > Rpm-list at lists.rpm.org
> > http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/attachments/20111007/09dd63f7/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:28:44 -0500
> From: Jim Galarowicz <jeg at krellinst.org>
> To: General discussion about the RPM package manager
> <rpm-list at lists.rpm.org>
> Subject: rpm: failed dependency even though the dso library is
> installed, but seems to not be "provided"
> Message-ID: <4E8F0C9C.9030408 at krellinst.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I have successfully built an openspeedshop rpm and installed it before,
> but now I'm having a problem with the latest source and spec file when
> trying to install the latest version of the openspeedshop rpm file.
>
> Specifically, I'm having trouble with a dso that is built in my own tool
> (OpenSpeedShop, www.openspeedshop.org).
> When I try to install, rpm installs flag the "so.0" variant to be not
> provided.
> I believe the automake option in the makefile is creating
> libopenss-cli.so which is linked to libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0 and
> additionally libopenss-cli.so.0 is also linked to libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0.
>
> Another library, libopenss-framework builds and installs successfully.
> libopenss-framework.so variants also appear to be similar but I don't
> have a problem with those dsos and rpm installation.
>
> [root at localhost kickstart-files]# ls -lastr /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.*
> 23056 -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 23608899 Sep 27 21:34
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0
> 4 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1541 Sep 27 21:34
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.la
> 0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 22 Sep 28 07:27
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.so.0 -> libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0
> 0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 22 Sep 28 07:27
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.so -> libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0
>
> [root at localhost kickstart-files]# ls -lastr
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework.*
> 8276 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 8470629 Sep 27 21:34
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework.so.1.0.0
> 4 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 1053 Sep 27 21:34
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework.la
> 0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 28 Sep 28 07:27
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework.so.1 -> libopenss-framework.so.1.0.0
> 0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 28 Sep 28 07:27
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework.so -> libopenss-framework.so.1.0.0
>
>
> Here is the error I'm seeing:
>
> rpm --install openspeedshop.OSS.x86_64.rpm
> error: Failed dependencies:
> libopenss-cli.so.0()(64bit) is needed by openspeedshop-2.0.1-3.x86_64
>
> or when I try to build a live CD:
> Error creating Live CD : Failed to build transaction :
> openspeedshop-2.0.1-3.x86_64 requires libopenss-cli.so.0()(64bit)
>
> I forced an install of OpenSpeedShop and the components on my laptop and
> now I can use some of the rpm options to query the installed rpm.
> I had to do rpm --install --nodeps in order to get around the error
> message:
> openspeedshop-2.0.1-3.x86_64 requires libopenss-cli.so.0()(64bit)
>
> I'm seeing the libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0 does not follow the pattern of the
> other OpenSpeedShop dsos when I do this query:
> rpm --query --fileprovide openspeedshop-2.0.1-3.x86_64
>
> ...
> ...
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-CustomExperimentPanel.so.0.0.0
> libopenss-CustomExperimentPanel.so.0()(64bit)
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-ExprInfo.so.0.0.0
> libopenss-ExprInfo.so.0()(64bit)
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-framework-binutils.so.1.0.0
> libopenss-framework-binutils.so.1()(64bit)
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-gui.so.0.0.0 libopenss-gui.so.0()(64bit)
> ...
> /opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-cli.so.0.0.0 ##### Nothing listed
> here - no libopenss-cli.so.0 like the other dsos
>
> I think that is the key, but the Makefile.am for libopenss-cli has the
> same "-export-dynamic -version-info 0:0:0" clause that
> the other dsos that show provides output that I'd like to see for
> libopenss-cli: "/opt/OSS/lib64/libopenss-gui.so.0.0.0
> libopenss-gui.so.0()(64bit)"
>
> libopenss_cli_la_LDFLAGS = \
> -L$(top_srcdir)/libopenss-message \
> -L$(top_srcdir)/libopenss-framework \
> -L$(top_srcdir)/libopenss-queries \
> @PYTHON_LDFLAGS@ \
> @OPENMP_LDFLAGS@ \
> -export-dynamic -version-info 0:0:0
>
> Does anyone have any experience with this kind of issue?
>
> It seems it could be an autotools usage or rpm spec file issue? I hope
> this is the correct list to post this.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim G
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list at lists.rpm.org
> http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
>
>
> End of Rpm-list Digest, Vol 128, Issue 5
> ****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-list/attachments/20111010/1a2a8da6/attachment.html>
More information about the Rpm-list
mailing list