On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 12:35 PM Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 09:10:13AM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > IMO this is ugly and unfortunate. > > The design around sysusers expects a model where files are unpacked > > and *then* scripts are run. RPM doesn't work that way, which makes all > > of this fall apart. In the ideal case, we could generate preinstall > > scriptlets for this stuff from detected sysusers files on the fly, but > > there's currently no way to do that. > > So.... not helping _currently_, but could we make rpm itself handle this in > a different way: stuff the systemd-sysusers files into metadata available > before anything is installed? > Sure, we could. > > A more practical way to work around this is to always subpackage out > > sysusers and use dependencies to guarantee that it's installed before > > the package itself is. This would require the systemd file trigger to > > Ugggghhhhhh. That's practical but gross, unless there's some kind of > macro/automation for the subpackage. > Well, this *was* one reason I wanted subpackage generators... https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/329 -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
