Bug 69781 – shadow 4.0.5 file collision

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Albert Hopkins (RETIRED) 2004-11-01 16:13:21 UTC]

sys-apps/shadow-4.0.5 will not install with the collision protect feature.  The following error is raised:

* checking 269 files for package collisions
existing file /usr/share/man/man3/getspnam.3.gz is not owned by this package
* spend 0.566694021225 seconds checking for file collisions
* This package is blocked because it wants to overwrite
* files belonging to other packages (see messages above).
* If you have no clue what this is all about report it
* as a bug for this package on http://bugs.gentoo.org

package sys-apps/shadow-4.0.5 NOT merged

[~]$ epm -qf /usr/share/man/man3/getspnam.3.gz
man-pages-1.67



Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:




~x86, portage-2.0.51-r2

[Comment 1 Daniel Black (RETIRED) 2004-11-02 01:32:49 UTC]

*** Bug 69807 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Comment 2 SpanKY 2004-11-02 05:54:13 UTC]

fixed in cvs, thanks

[Comment 3 Alexander Skwar 2004-11-02 11:12:10 UTC]

How did you fix it?

[Comment 4 Alexander Skwar 2004-11-02 11:21:46 UTC]

Nevermind. I found it myself. You're removing the conflicting file from the shadow package.

[Comment 5 Daniel Black (RETIRED) 2004-11-02 15:50:34 UTC]

*** Bug 69875 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Comment 6 Gregorio Guidi (RETIRED) 2004-11-03 02:57:49 UTC]

revision 1.9 (by eradicator) introduced a typo that makes the command fail.
Please apply this one-liner:

--- shadow-4.0.5.ebuild.orig    2004-11-03 11:51:27.972656712 +0100
+++ shadow-4.0.5.ebuild 2004-11-03 11:51:48.075600600 +0100
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@

        # Remove manpages that are handled by other packages
        find ${D}/usr/share/man \
-               '(' -name id.1 -o -name passwd.5 -o name getspnam.3 ')' \
+               '(' -name id.1 -o -name passwd.5 -o -name getspnam.3 ')' \
                -exec rm {} \;

        cd ${S}/doc

[Comment 7 Gregorio Guidi (RETIRED) 2004-11-03 03:04:16 UTC]

...why did I write "by eradicator"? forget that.

[Comment 8 SpanKY 2004-11-03 10:16:53 UTC]

done, thanks