On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 8:21 AM, cheese@nosuchhost.net wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2018, Paul W. Frields wrote:
The introduction of non-persistent /run has apparently created an issue where some RPM packages raise verification issues depending on the umask present when a process from that package starts. The issue is further explained in a tracking bug here:
Can not check that bug, as it is an internal one at least i have no permission to read that.
That's my fault, linked improperly. Ignore it as it's a private bug. It's not useful anyway, the later bug is.
While arguably not a showstopper for Fedora, it's certainly an annoyance to have RPMs not verify post-installation when a packaged service is started. This situation's also potentially harmful downstream to RHEL. It means that customers who have to go through audit processes for STIG[1] compliance will get dinged (even if explainable) for this packaging issue.
Note that in the tracking bug above, there's a reference to a specific example which was fixed appropriately for resource-agents:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1462802
Would packaging folks agree that it's worth fixing files not using tmpfiles.d (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d) to do so?
+1
Thanks for input here.