Re: Fedora 31 Self-Contained Change proposal: Limit Scriptlet Usage of core packages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> == Detailed Description ==
>
> Currently we know how to make an installable OS with packages that
> doesn't require the use of scriptlets, indeed rpm-ostree and others
> have already done this on a significantly bigger scale. So we plan to
> remove direct scriptlets from most (if not all) of the packages in the
> main fedora container image for Fedora 31. This means all four of:
> %pre/%post/%preun/%postun. After this change it'd be good to have some
> kind of temporary exception to be granted before those packages could
> add a scriptlet back (post F31 work).

Do I understand correctly that triggers aren't affected here?

> Almost all of the hard work is already done, as rpm can react to files
> being dropped in specified places with known actions (Eg. In this way
> systemd components can create users or files). There are a few minor
> changes needed to packages to move from the old way of doing things
> (Eg. calling adduser) to doing the new thing. Note that while a
> program will still be run at installation time, those programs will be
> few and easily audited (as against the 666 slightly different ways of
> adding a user we currently have).

Is there a document describing common things that are done with
scriptlets and the "proper", non-scriptlet way to do them?  (If not,
could one be made?)

> == Scope ==
>
> Proposal owners:
>
> * James Antill
> * 1 needs to get combine.d into the distribution, and then /etc/shells
> can use that.
> * 2 minor wrangling of package owners to tweak specfiles.

Do I understand correctly that you plan to send PRs to all packages in
question?

> * Other developers:
>
> * Policies and guidelines: We should work toward only allowing new
> scriptlets to appear with policy exceptions, in any of the fixed
> packages. This needs to be done somewhat carefully, and post F31.

Would it be possible to write the policy first, rather than trying to
get maintainers to conform to an unknown standard?

Thanks,
--Robbie

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux