Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 130449 - slocate daily script still uses nonexistent slocate group
Summary: slocate daily script still uses nonexistent slocate group
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 130435
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Other
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Linux bug wranglers
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-04-19 02:54 UTC by Attila Tóth
Modified: 2006-04-19 06:03 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
Straightforward change (slocate.daily.diff,264 bytes, patch)
2006-04-19 02:59 UTC, Attila Tóth
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Attila Tóth 2006-04-19 02:54:21 UTC
Moving to slocate-2.7-r8 the ebuild proposed to rename slocate group to locate. Although cron.daily/slocate script still contains group slocate instead of locate.
Comment 1 Attila Tóth 2006-04-19 02:59:56 UTC
Created attachment 84943 [details, diff]
Straightforward change

Attached patch shows straightforward change for correction.
Comment 2 Attila Tóth 2006-04-19 05:21:15 UTC
This line seems to be not present on newer Gentoo instalaltions.
I suspect, that the responsible line remained in the slocate cron file from a previous version I can't find now.

Correct me, if I'm wrong.
Comment 3 Vlastimil Babka (Caster) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-04-19 05:39:47 UTC
Check out my bug report #130435
group was renamed in 2.7-r8 but the cron script got chown line added only in 3.1
You sure see it in 2.7-r8 ? Or you also got 3.1 ? (then your report would be a dupe)
Comment 4 Attila Tóth 2006-04-19 06:03:59 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Check out my bug report #130435
> group was renamed in 2.7-r8 but the cron script got chown line added only in
> 3.1
> You sure see it in 2.7-r8 ? Or you also got 3.1 ? (then your report would be a
> dupe)
> 

You're correct, it's a duplicate of yours.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 130435 ***