-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On April 5, 2004 10:43 am, seth vidal wrote: > > but with the proper group permissions should be ok, right? > > yes - but I didn't see the value in letting it continue. > > If you're allowed to update the cache you better have superuser value. > > > so it was kind of shortcut instead of full-blown permissions check? Not > > to be pita, but just out of curiosity I wonder if that's going to change > > since this is not the most elegant solution (we have more than one admin > > downloading packages) maybe it's worth another option in config: check > > for 'root' or check for group? > > If you have more than one admin downloading packages at the same time > things will break. I don't think letting the average user update the > cache just b/c they're a member of a group is necessarily a good idea. Thanks for comments and suggestions. Now I've got the idea on why and what is happening. I would still consider doing monkey-patch to yum so root is not required because that would meet our requirements and internal procedures... - -- Dmitry Makovey Web Systems Administrator Athabasca University (780) 675-6245 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAcZLcyDrVuGfS98QRAsP7AJ9QKd4wpnb0gCChv7rizPXhkiWzfACeN1yX 3L3p5bfamUa0q8zhidhFSzI= =ATsx -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
