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 2007-10-08 19:46 EST ------- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #6) > > > > 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] > > You're missing what %_netsharedpath does. For example %_netsharedpath /usr > makes rpm not drop any files under /usr but just assume the files it'd drop > there are already there (useful for eg. a central NFS-shared /usr - the server > installs rpms with files there, clients install the same RPMs locally but don't > touch anything in /usr). However, %_netsharedpath only affects files in package > payloads, scriptlets need to be taken care of by packagers. > Aha, crystal clear, thanks for taking the time to explain. > > 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? > > Possibly (but that might be harder than it seems). But that's not my point, the > point is that more that those files are marked as %config and thus supposedly... > configurable, modifiable. OK, I understand. I think in this case Ports.pm doesn't need %config though - it should certainly be in /var/lib/shorewall-perl but it isn't editable - it merely reflects local state. -- 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