CentOS - Jun 2018 - Updated krb5 rpm package altered existing krb5.conf - No go

> Am 15.06.2018 um 01:04 schrieb Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at
gmail.com>:
> 
> On 06/14/2018 09:30 AM, me at tdiehl.org wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Richard Grainger wrote:
>> 
>>> I looked at the spec file in the source RPM for the krb5-libs
package
>>> and it it has the correct %config(noreplace) directive next to that
>>> file in the %files section, so this is mysterious.
>> 
>> I too can confirm this behavior. 
> 
> # rpm -qa krb\* --triggers
> triggerun scriptlet (using /bin/sh) -- krb5-libs < 1.15.1-13
> if ! grep -q 'includedir /etc/krb5.conf.d' /etc/krb5.conf ; then
>     sed -i '1i # Other applications require this directory to perform
krb5 configuration.\nincludedir /etc/krb5.conf.d/\n' /etc/krb5.conf
> fi
> 
> 
> Looks like that's the culprit.

Good to know, but writing a rpmnew or rpmsave file would be nice to check
against the life used file.

The samba people are aware of that problem regarding the include line and are
working on a patch ? the support at SerNet told me.

	Regards . G?tz

On Mon, 18 Jun 2018, G?tz Reinicke wrote:
>
>
>> Am 15.06.2018 um 01:04 schrieb Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at
gmail.com>:
>>
>> On 06/14/2018 09:30 AM, me at tdiehl.org wrote:
>>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Richard Grainger wrote:
>>>
>>>> I looked at the spec file in the source RPM for the krb5-libs
package
>>>> and it it has the correct %config(noreplace) directive next to
that
>>>> file in the %files section, so this is mysterious.
>>>
>>> I too can confirm this behavior.
>>
>> # rpm -qa krb\* --triggers
>> triggerun scriptlet (using /bin/sh) -- krb5-libs < 1.15.1-13
>> if ! grep -q 'includedir /etc/krb5.conf.d' /etc/krb5.conf ;
then
>>     sed -i '1i # Other applications require this directory to
perform krb5 configuration.\nincludedir /etc/krb5.conf.d/\n' /etc/krb5.conf
>> fi
>>
>>
>> Looks like that's the culprit.
>
>
> Good to know, but writing a rpmnew or rpmsave file would be nice to check
against the life used file.
Agreed! IMO this is a packaging bug. Triggers do not drop rpmsave files. I
suspect the chances of getting
Red Hat to fix it are slim to none. Fixing it would most likely break other
things for them.
>
> The samba people are aware of that problem regarding the include line and
are working on a patch ? the support at SerNet told me.
I agree they are aware of it but I suspect it is a low priority thing given
they have known about this since 2016-12-29.

I do think it would be relatively easy for SerNet to patch around in their
paid for rpms. alas I do not have the budget for them. :-(

The bug is available at https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12488

Regards,

-- 
Tom			me at tdiehl.org

> Am 18.06.2018 um 16:33 schrieb me at tdiehl.org:
> 
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2018, G?tz Reinicke wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 15.06.2018 um 01:04 schrieb Gordon Messmer <gordon.messmer at
gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>> On 06/14/2018 09:30 AM, me at tdiehl.org wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Richard Grainger wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I looked at the spec file in the source RPM for the
krb5-libs package
>>>>> and it it has the correct %config(noreplace) directive next
to that
>>>>> file in the %files section, so this is mysterious.
>>>> 
>>>> I too can confirm this behavior.
>>> 
>>> # rpm -qa krb\* --triggers
>>> triggerun scriptlet (using /bin/sh) -- krb5-libs < 1.15.1-13
>>> if ! grep -q 'includedir /etc/krb5.conf.d' /etc/krb5.conf ;
then
>>>    sed -i '1i # Other applications require this directory to
perform krb5 configuration.\nincludedir /etc/krb5.conf.d/\n' /etc/krb5.conf
>>> fi
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Looks like that's the culprit.
>> 
>> 
>> Good to know, but writing a rpmnew or rpmsave file would be nice to
check against the life used file.
> 
> Agreed! IMO this is a packaging bug. Triggers do not drop rpmsave files. I
suspect the chances of getting
> Red Hat to fix it are slim to none. Fixing it would most likely break other
things for them.
> 
>> 
>> The samba people are aware of that problem regarding the include line
and are working on a patch ? the support at SerNet told me.
> 
> I agree they are aware of it but I suspect it is a low priority thing given
> they have known about this since 2016-12-29.
> 
> I do think it would be relatively easy for SerNet to patch around in their
> paid for rpms. alas I do not have the budget for them. :-(
> 
> The bug is available at https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12488
<https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12488>
Patched https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11573
<https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11573>

	/G?tz