Ed Greshko writes:
I just installed an F30 VM from Fedora-Xfce-Live-x86_64-30-1.2.iso After install, the very first thing I did from a terminal was. [egreshko@f30x ~]$ sudo authselect current We trust you have received the usual lecture from the local System Administrator. It usually boils down to these three things: #1) Respect the privacy of others. #2) Think before you type. #3) With great power comes great responsibility. [sudo] password for egreshko: Profile ID: sssd Enabled features: - with-fingerprint - with-silent-lastlog
It's surprising that sssd is the default, and not minimal.
and [egreshko@f30x ~]$ ll /etc/nsswitch.conflrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 29 Jul 19 09:52 /etc/nsswitch.conf -> /etc/authselect/nsswitch.confWhen I installed from the Live image there was no such step as you've dimly recalled.Did you, by chance, not install from the Xfce live image but from the Netinst image or Everything image?
No, that part I'm sure of. I loaded the live image onto a USB stick and drove to the local computer shop (a dying breed) where the kid built the Threadripper for me. I had him boot the Live image off the USB stick, it did. Then I picked it up, took it home, and did the install off it.
Now, here's the thing, on: 1) the machine where /var/lib/authselect is mostly empty, and 2) on the one which initially had F30 installed off it:
[mrsam@thinkpad etc]$ ls -al nsswitch.conf -rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1802 Jul 17 18:39 nsswitch.confBoth machines had nsswitch.conf updated when I updated them last night, installing the glibc update.
In the glibc rpm: %verify(not md5 size mtime) %config(noreplace) /etc/nsswitch.conf I found a handy-dandy table, here: %verify(not md5 size mtime) %config(noreplace) /etc/nsswitch.confAccording to the table: when installing an rpm update which updates the config file, if rpm thinks that the previous version's config file was not edited/modified, it gets replaced by the file from the new version.
If you were to run "rpm -V glibc" even though the glibc-installed nsswitch.conf was clobbered by the symlink, the %verify will result in it not being reported as modified.
But what about when an update get installed? Does that mean that rpm will also conclude that the existing config file is unchanged, and, according to this table, will just replace the symlink with the file from the new rpm version?
I should be able to run a quick test of this, tomorrow-ish…
Attachment:
pgpSm7yyJofch.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
