Re: [suse-security] SuSE Security Announcement: openssh (SuSE-SA:2001:045) (re-released SuSE-SA:2001:044)
DANGER: as far as i can remeber rpm -ba (build all) might also do an install on newer rpms the installation might be not in root but if it is the old ssh is overwritten.
Wow, and they say most drugs don't affect the memory. Unless you have an extremely non standard version of RPM (hint: you do not) rpm -ba builds source and nbinary rpm's, which are simply dropped into /usr/src/suse/RPMS/ whatever. You have to install them yourself.
Careful Kurt, that's not correct. Depending on how the spec file is written, a full install is executed. Not doing this full install can make building the binary rpm rather difficult at times. Of course, not running rpm -ba as root is always a very good idea. Volker
On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 v.kuhlmann@elec.canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
> > > DANGER:
> > > as far as i can remeber rpm -ba (build all) might also do an install
> > > on newer rpms the installation might be not in root but if it is
> > > the old ssh is overwritten.
> >
> > Wow, and they say most drugs don't affect the memory. Unless you have an
> > extremely non standard version of RPM (hint: you do not) rpm -ba builds
> > source and nbinary rpm's, which are simply dropped into /usr/src/suse/RPMS/
> > whatever. You have to install them yourself.
>
> Careful Kurt, that's not correct. Depending on how the spec file is
yes yes , his wrong about the drugs, but i admit he is right about the memory.
> written, a full install is executed. Not doing this full install can
> make building the binary rpm rather difficult at times. Of course, not
> running rpm -ba as root is always a very good idea.
very good idea, but on the older spec files the install was always full,
and i think (my memory) rpm did not support it. so one must be root
to make an rpm, and the mentioned system was suse60, and newer rpms
might be hard to build as rpm matured ther are some macros added
... of course there are several ways around rpm
* donot use it (bad cause i like it)
* modify the spec
* ?
--
BINGO: Ich komme auf Sie zu
--- Engelbert Gruber ----=~
SSG Fintl,Gruber,Lassnig
A6410 Telfs Untermarkt 9
Tel. ++43-5262-64727 ----=~
On Mon, Dec 10, 2001 at 11:26 +1300, v.kuhlmann@elec.canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
DANGER: as far as i can remeber rpm -ba (build all) might also do an install on newer rpms the installation might be not in root but if it is the old ssh is overwritten.
Wow, and they say most drugs don't affect the memory. Unless you have an extremely non standard version of RPM (hint: you do not) rpm -ba builds source and nbinary rpm's, which are simply dropped into /usr/src/suse/RPMS/ whatever. You have to install them yourself.
Careful Kurt, that's not correct. Depending on how the spec file is written, a full install is executed. Not doing this full install can make building the binary rpm rather difficult at times. Of course, not running rpm -ba as root is always a very good idea.
I always was under the impression that the build and installation was done in a *different* location than the place the binary rpm installs to (read: the build is done in a temporary scrap space). Only _installing_ the _binary_ rpm -- no matter if it's the vendor's or your roll-your-own one -- will make the stuff appear in your system (show up in the expected location) and maybe clobber existing stuff which is in the way. As long as you only build sources nothing but a little bit of temp space should be involved. Yes, the system might get examined for dependencies while configuring things before the build. I'm not positive if it takes priviledges to do this and I doubt that it should. But the system should definitely *not* be modified at compilation time! Should this have changed, you might want to contact the rpm's author and ask him to unbreak his software. Think of a build cluster which gets "updated" on the fly while it's just supposed to compile things. And think of installs which fail since the missing step is done at compile time. This looks wrong to me ... And why do we discuss build "problems" on -security? virtually yours 82D1 9B9C 01DC 4FB4 D7B4 61BE 3F49 4F77 72DE DA76 Gerhard Sittig true | mail -s "get gpg key" Gerhard.Sittig@gmx.net -- If you don't understand or are scared by any of the above ask your parents or an adult to help you.
participants (3)
-
engelbert.gruber＠ssg.co.at -
Gerhard Sittig -
v.kuhlmann＠elec.canterbury.ac.nz