[gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Raffaele Belardi]

For those who had missed the news like myself:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/patches

I used it to patch two packages (gnucash and blender), works perfectly!

raffaele

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Dale]

Raffaele Belardi wrote:
> For those who had missed the news like myself:
>
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki//etc/portage/patches
>
> I used it to patch two packages (gnucash and blender), works perfectly!
>
> raffaele
>
>

I've used it a few times myself and it does work well.  The only thing I
seem to always forget, until emerge pukes on my keyboard and reminds me,
file permissions need to be portage:portage.  When I create the patch
file, it is set to root:root and I always forget to change it. 

It does make it easier to fix problems that are patched but not yet
available in the tree. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 591 bytes --]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 03:36:42 -0500, Dale wrote:

> I've used it a few times myself and it does work well.  The only thing I
> seem to always forget, until emerge pukes on my keyboard and reminds me,
> file permissions need to be portage:portage.  When I create the patch
> file, it is set to root:root and I always forget to change it. 

Really? All my patch files are owned by either root or my normal user.
As long as they are world-readable, portage hasn't complained yet.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

The cow is nothing but a machine which makes grass fit for us people to eat.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 03:36:42 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>> I've used it a few times myself and it does work well.  The only thing I
>> seem to always forget, until emerge pukes on my keyboard and reminds me,
>> file permissions need to be portage:portage.  When I create the patch
>> file, it is set to root:root and I always forget to change it. 
> Really? All my patch files are owned by either root or my normal user.
> As long as they are world-readable, portage hasn't complained yet.
>
>


It does it every time here.  It did it just the other day.  In the error
emerge spits out, it even says something about permissions and that's
when I remember to go change it.  After that, it works fine.  Maybe it
is not world readable or something.  I dunno.  I just know I have to
change it before it works.  Now that I think about it, it started doing
that when I began using Krusader as my file manager.  Maybe it is
something to do with that.  I don't recall any of the other portage
files needing that. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Arve Barsnes]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 11:28, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> It does it every time here.  It did it just the other day.  In the error
> emerge spits out, it even says something about permissions and that's
> when I remember to go change it.  After that, it works fine.  Maybe it
> is not world readable or something.  I dunno.  I just know I have to
> change it before it works.  Now that I think about it, it started doing
> that when I began using Krusader as my file manager.  Maybe it is
> something to do with that.  I don't recall any of the other portage
> files needing that.

Maybe your default umask has changed, or Krusader has its own default.
Just type umask in a terminal to see what it's set to.

Cheers,
Arve

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Dale]

Arve Barsnes wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 11:28, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It does it every time here.  It did it just the other day.  In the error
>> emerge spits out, it even says something about permissions and that's
>> when I remember to go change it.  After that, it works fine.  Maybe it
>> is not world readable or something.  I dunno.  I just know I have to
>> change it before it works.  Now that I think about it, it started doing
>> that when I began using Krusader as my file manager.  Maybe it is
>> something to do with that.  I don't recall any of the other portage
>> files needing that.
> Maybe your default umask has changed, or Krusader has its own default.
> Just type umask in a terminal to see what it's set to.
>
> Cheers,
> Arve
>
>


I get this in a Konsole. 


root@fireball / # umask
0022
root@fireball / #


I'm not sure how to check what Krusader is set too.  I did do this tho. 
I created a test file within Krusader, named test.file, and got this in
Konsole:


root@fireball / # ls -al /etc/portage/patches/net-libs/test.file
-rw------- 1 root root 0 Sep  2 10:11
/etc/portage/patches/net-libs/test.file
root@fireball / #


It's not world readable from my understanding.  Only root can read or
write that file.  I then used touch to create test.file2 within Konsole
and got this:


root@fireball /etc/portage/patches/net-libs # ls -al
/etc/portage/patches/net-libs/test.file*
-rw------- 1 root root 0 Sep  2 10:11
/etc/portage/patches/net-libs/test.file
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Sep  2 10:14
/etc/portage/patches/net-libs/test.file2
root@fireball /etc/portage/patches/net-libs #


It appears Konsole creates a world readable file while Krusader
doesn't.  To be honest tho, I sort of think Krusader is doing it
correctly.  It does mean I have to change it for portage to work but it
should be set to portage since it is what is using/reading the file
anyway.  While it sort of annoys me that I forget to change the file,
I'm not sure I want to change the setting, since it makes sense to me
that it does it that way. 

At least now we know why it errors out with a permission problem tho. 
Most likely, unless someone else is using Krusader as I am, not many
will run into that problem. 

Thanks for pointing that out because I was curious as to why it started
doing that way.  We can blame this on Dolphin making it difficult to run
as root.  That's why I switched.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Oh, sorry for being so original with the file names.  ROFL 

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 905 bytes --]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 10:23:15 -0500, Dale wrote:

> It appears Konsole creates a world readable file while Krusader
> doesn't.  To be honest tho, I sort of think Krusader is doing it
> correctly.  It does mean I have to change it for portage to work but it
> should be set to portage since it is what is using/reading the file
> anyway.  While it sort of annoys me that I forget to change the file,
> I'm not sure I want to change the setting, since it makes sense to me
> that it does it that way. 

This appears to be a non-default setting in Krusader. I just tried
created text files, both as a user and as root, and they had 644
permissions. For some reason, your Krusader is ignoring the umask setting
and creating files with restrictive permissions. Does it do the same when
run as a non-root user?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Get your copy at http://www.geekthing.com/~robf/gensig/

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 10:23:15 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>> It appears Konsole creates a world readable file while Krusader
>> doesn't.  To be honest tho, I sort of think Krusader is doing it
>> correctly.  It does mean I have to change it for portage to work but it
>> should be set to portage since it is what is using/reading the file
>> anyway.  While it sort of annoys me that I forget to change the file,
>> I'm not sure I want to change the setting, since it makes sense to me
>> that it does it that way. 
> This appears to be a non-default setting in Krusader. I just tried
> created text files, both as a user and as root, and they had 644
> permissions. For some reason, your Krusader is ignoring the umask setting
> and creating files with restrictive permissions. Does it do the same when
> run as a non-root user?
>
>


When ran as my user dale, it does this when I create a text file:


root@fireball / # ls -al /home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
-rw------- 1 dale users 0 Sep  2 20:02
/home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
root@fireball / #


It seems to do the same to me.  Again tho, it may not be the normal
thing but it is sort of what I would expect.  When ran as root, I don't
normally want things to be world readable.  Of course, as a user, that
may be preferred depending on the situation.  I browsed around in config
area and didn't see anything about default new file permissions.  If it
is to be ajusted somewhere, I'd suspect a file edit or environment
variable will be required. 

I just thought it was some new portage security feature that got added.
I didn't recall seeing it mentioned on -dev but sometimes they don't
post new features either.  I even thought it might have to do with the
new secure sync changes.  It never occurred to me that it was the file
manager I was using.  If I had known that, I wouldn't have posted about
it since likely few use Krusader.  Still a bit odd that Krusader does it
so differently.  < me scratches head >

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1650 bytes --]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 20:13:03 -0500, Dale wrote:

> > This appears to be a non-default setting in Krusader. I just tried
> > created text files, both as a user and as root, and they had 644
> > permissions. For some reason, your Krusader is ignoring the umask
> > setting and creating files with restrictive permissions. Does it do
> > the same when run as a non-root user?

> When ran as my user dale, it does this when I create a text file:
> 
> root@fireball / # ls -al /home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
> -rw------- 1 dale users 0 Sep  2 20:02
> /home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
> root@fireball / #
> 
> 
> It seems to do the same to me.  Again tho, it may not be the normal
> thing but it is sort of what I would expect.  When ran as root, I don't
> normally want things to be world readable.

Are you sure of that? If you create or edit a program's configuration
file in /etc, that is a global setting that you want to be used by any
user running the program. That won't happen if the users can't read it.

> Of course, as a user, that
> may be preferred depending on the situation.  I browsed around in config
> area and didn't see anything about default new file permissions.  If it
> is to be ajusted somewhere, I'd suspect a file edit or environment
> variable will be required. 

I couldn't see the option either, it may be worth looking in the config
file. Clearly something is changing the behaviour for one of us.

You could try moving the config file so it starts with a default setting,
or running it as a different user.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I cna ytpe 300 wrods pre mniuet!!!

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/patches

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 20:13:03 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>>> This appears to be a non-default setting in Krusader. I just tried
>>> created text files, both as a user and as root, and they had 644
>>> permissions. For some reason, your Krusader is ignoring the umask
>>> setting and creating files with restrictive permissions. Does it do
>>> the same when run as a non-root user?
>> When ran as my user dale, it does this when I create a text file:
>>
>> root@fireball / # ls -al /home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
>> -rw------- 1 dale users 0 Sep  2 20:02
>> /home/dale/Desktop/Documents/test.file
>> root@fireball / #
>>
>>
>> It seems to do the same to me.  Again tho, it may not be the normal
>> thing but it is sort of what I would expect.  When ran as root, I don't
>> normally want things to be world readable.
> Are you sure of that? If you create or edit a program's configuration
> file in /etc, that is a global setting that you want to be used by any
> user running the program. That won't happen if the users can't read it.


I recall setting up my UPS which requires passwords, root in my case,
and the howto saying it should not be world readable since then anyone
can get the passwords.  Maybe that is an exception but when running as
root, I sort of expect things to be restricted, certainly not readable
by anyone.  It's why I access only /etc, /root and maybe a couple other
root only areas when using Krusader.  Using it anywhere else is just not
good. 

When being run as a user tho, that is different.  I wouldn't mind files
being world readable since it is being done as a user who generally
doesn't have root access anyway.  That's just my thinking tho. 


>> Of course, as a user, that
>> may be preferred depending on the situation.  I browsed around in config
>> area and didn't see anything about default new file permissions.  If it
>> is to be ajusted somewhere, I'd suspect a file edit or environment
>> variable will be required. 
> I couldn't see the option either, it may be worth looking in the config
> file. Clearly something is changing the behaviour for one of us.
>
> You could try moving the config file so it starts with a default setting,
> or running it as a different user.
>
>

Well, given it sort of works as expected, as root which is how I use it
anyway, I'm going to leave well enough alone.  If I started using it as
a user tho, yea, I'd want it to behave differently.  I'd try to find a
way to make it see the difference and behave differently depending on
how it is run, which I suspect is doable somehow. 

At least emerge does a good job of reminding me to change the
permissions tho.  We all know how cryptic emerge and its error output
can be at times.  lol 

Dale

:-)  :-)