Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: shorewall-perl - Perl-based compiler for Shoreline Firewall https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=321711 ------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood@xxxxxxxxx 2007-10-07 19:37 EST ------- Hi Ville - I can see a way of possibly doing that by having a symlink to /var/lib/shorewall-perl/Ports.pm in /usr/share/shorewall-perl/Shorewall/Ports.pm, and creating /var/lib/shorewall-perl/Ports.pm in %post on package install or upgrade. Would that be ok? However, I am sure there is some aspect of the issue I am missing, because doing an installation/upgrade of an rpm with a read only /usr wouldn't work anyway, and so I don't actually understand what is wrong with creating Ports.pm somewhere on /usr? [Please note, I'm not challenging what you say, as I am sure you're right, but there is something I am missing] However, this problem has seemingly larger scope. Take your LTSP example - if the user installs shorewall, and then LTSP which modifies /etc/{services,protocols}, the Ports.pm would then be incorrect until shorewall is upgraded again. The only way around that would be with triggers, which is... horrific... So all in all, I can't help thinking the simple solution of creating Ports.pm at build time from the build root /etc/{services,protocols} is probably as good as we can get. Shouldn't the LTSP packager be getting his changes to these files incororated into the setup package, rather than changing those files on package installation? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review