Summary: | sys-apps/portage: properly support FreeBSD filesystem or filesystem mounted with grpid|bsdgroups with FEATURE="userpriv" | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | i.Dark_Templar <idarktemplar> |
Component: | Unclassified | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED OBSOLETE | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Attachments: | freebsd-uid-gid-install.patch |
Description
i.Dark_Templar
2017-04-10 21:12:25 UTC
Created attachment 469660 [details, diff]
freebsd-uid-gid-install.patch
This is a patch with proposed solution to fix this issue by fixing uid/gid of EROOT directory of install image, i.e. ${ED} or ${D}
(In reply to i.Dark_Templar from comment #1) > Created attachment 469660 [details, diff] [details, diff] > freebsd-uid-gid-install.patch > > This is a patch with proposed solution to fix this issue by fixing uid/gid > of EROOT directory of install image, i.e. ${ED} or ${D} Are the getent calls really necessary? I would think that this should work:] chown "${PORTAGE_INST_UID}:${PORTAGE_INST_GID}" "${_x}" chown command takes username/groupname both in form of name and in form of ID, and I preferred to get rid of this ambiguity in the patch. This possible issue aside, I think getent call may be omitted. |