Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
quickpkg vs emerge --buildpkgonly file rights [fixed]
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CaptainBlood
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 3884

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2024 10:37 pm    Post subject: quickpkg vs emerge --buildpkgonly file rights [fixed] Reply with quote

quickpkg does -rw-r----- whereas
emerge --buildpkgonly does -rw-r--r--.

Because here is multiple systems with common -march,
it would be nice if both were doing the same things, preferably chmod o+r here.
since packages build on system A can run on system B.

Only non root user can connect to another system here.

Thks 4 ur attention, interest & support.
_________________
USE="-* ..." in /etc/portage/make.conf here, i.e. a countermeasure to portage implicit braces, belt & diaper paradigm
LT: "I've been doing a passable imitation of the Fontana di Trevi, except my medium is mucus. Sooo much mucus. "


Last edited by CaptainBlood on Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:14 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bstaletic
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 Apr 2014
Posts: 376

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2024 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

quickpkg --help wrote:
Code:
  --umask UMASK         umask used during package creation (default is 0077)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eschwartz
Developer
Developer


Joined: 29 Oct 2023
Posts: 229

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2024 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Due to hysterical raisins, quickpkg assumes that when you bundle up files that were already installed, some of those files could have secret material in them that is only readable by root and shouldn't actually be in a binpackage at all, so it uses a restrictive umask that emerge --buildpkg doesn't use as a workaround for the bad quickpkg package creation process.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CaptainBlood
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 3884

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bstaletic,
Nice; from a operational pov the clue seems:
Code:
quickpkg --umask 0072

eschwartz,
I was expecting such an explanation when I first posted.
That brings complexity to the casual user, imho.

typo raisins -> reasons?

Thks 4 ur attention, interest & support.
_________________
USE="-* ..." in /etc/portage/make.conf here, i.e. a countermeasure to portage implicit braces, belt & diaper paradigm
LT: "I've been doing a passable imitation of the Fontana di Trevi, except my medium is mucus. Sooo much mucus. "
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eschwartz
Developer
Developer


Joined: 29 Oct 2023
Posts: 229

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CaptainBlood wrote:
bstaletic,
Nice; from a operational pov the clue seems:
Code:
quickpkg --umask 0072

eschwartz,
I was expecting such an explanation when I first posted.
That brings complexity to the casual user, imho.


Certainly, and another form of complexity for the casual user is that --include-unmodified-config defaults to NO instead of YES.

That default is apparently because quickpkg cannot know whether the currently installed version of a package was installed from a quickpkg that used --include-config=y with modified configs, meaning there is no way to tell whether a config was actually modified or not.

quickpkg was originally implemented in a mistaken manner and in the grand tradition of the worst kind of "initial problematic design", fixing it would result in a different kind of breakage. That means there is not currently foreseen to be a way to fix the problem and therefore the defaults cannot change.

Call it an "early mover dis-advantage", if you will. :)

CaptainBlood wrote:

typo raisins -> reasons?


See the variant spelling at http://www.catb.org/esr/jargon/html/H/hysterical-reasons.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CaptainBlood
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 3884

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eschwartz wrote:
Certainly, and another form of complexity for the casual user is that --include-unmodified-config defaults to NO instead of YES.
Thks pointing that out.

Got bitten hard with --include-config activated in alias (e.g. sys-boot/grub), now removed.
This other option seems another story. I'll think over adding it instead.

eschwartz wrote:
See the variant spelling at http://www.catb.org/esr/jargon/html/H/hysterical-reasons.html
Thks 4 improving my english.

Thks 4 ur attention, interest & support.
_________________
USE="-* ..." in /etc/portage/make.conf here, i.e. a countermeasure to portage implicit braces, belt & diaper paradigm
LT: "I've been doing a passable imitation of the Fontana di Trevi, except my medium is mucus. Sooo much mucus. "
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Other Things Gentoo All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum