On Sat, 2021-11-27 at 09:01 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > [...] > > > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UsersAndGroups/#_dynamic_allocation > > > > say: > > > > "Create a <package-name>.sysusers file with the user definition and add > > where usr/lib/sysusers.d/geekotest.conf is the path to one of the > > sysusers config file within the upstream source, but it doesn't seem to > > work. [...] > > One problem with these sysusers rpm macros is that they expand to the > scriptlets very early: before even the main source tarball is extracted. Yeah, I figured that was probably the issue. I could not find any documentation of exactly when macro expansion happens, but I probably didn't look hard enough. > This is why the fedora packaging guideline more or less forces them to > be first-class spec sources. > > In the case of systemtap, we worked around this by moving the sysusers > config files right into the spec file - out of the source tarball - and > feed them to %pre and %install scripts by hand. > > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemtap/blob/rawhide/f/systemtap.spec#_91 > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemtap/blob/rawhide/f/systemtap.spec#_688 > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/systemtap/blob/rawhide/f/systemtap.spec#_818 > > IMO this is ugly and unfortunate. I agree. I'd really like a less icky solution to this :( -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA IRC: adamw | Twitter: adamw_ha https://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ 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
