Sorry for not including that information. While looking for that, I discovered that the real problem was %verify(owner group mode), where owner isn't valid. So after chnging that to user, it lookslike it works.
I'll go hide under a rock in shame over wasting peoples.
2013/9/5 Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Combination of %config and %verify is quite widely used. In other words, it is possible and known to work.On 09/05/2013 12:51 PM, Anders Wegge Keller wrote:
Is it possible to use both directives %config and %verify for the same
file? And if so, how? Adding both directives to the same line yields an
error, and having two lines in %files for the same file, yields a complaint
about the file being listed twice.
The reason I want to do this, is as follows:
At my work, we use rpm to pack files for a high-level machine control
system. Some of the configuration files are supposed to be editable on the
target system, without that being flagged as an verification error. But
they must be there, so if there isn't a file in place already, we want the
template distributed in the rpm package to be put in place.
If the combination of %verify and %config is not possible, I'd appreciate
an idea about how to accomplish the same thing, with a minimum of
complications.
There's insufficient details to even guess what the problem might be:
1) what is the exactly %files line you're using?
2) what is error message are you getting?
3) what rpm version is being used?
- Panu -
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
/Wegge
<http://wiki.wegge.dk>
<http://geowiki.wegge.dk>
_______________________________________________ Rpm-list mailing list Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
