Re: [coreutils] [patch] Re: Install enhancement request: capabilities

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 07:00:51 Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Ideally the package archive format should
> support capabilities if they're needed,
> and tar et. al. should support the attributes
> if they're important.

yes, but tar doesnt support it today

> From a package maint point of view,
> if you're changing a package to use capabilities,
> then adding the dep is a minor inconvenience.

that isnt the case.  in the oft-quoted "ping" case, the package itself isnt 
changing in any way.  the file permissions are simply being changed from 
granting it set*id to granting it the one explicit network capability it 
requires.

> Also one could take the view that adding a separate
> `setcap` call might be easier to maintain than
> messing with existing `install` commands.
> Also `install` might not have even been used.
> Also at a stretch, one could argue that having a dep
> on the binary package, might be useful to allow one to
> query which packages on the system require capabilties.

except that coreutils is required on a system which means `install` is 
required.  `setcap` is not.
-mike

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.