On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 1:24 PM Sam James <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 1 Aug 2021, at 17:42, Mike Gilbert <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 7:56 PM Sam James <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> This adds two tmpfiles related QA checks:
> >> 1) Verify packages don't install tmpfiles to /etc/tmpfiles.d, which
> >> is a deprecated location;
> >
> > sys-apps/systemd calls keepdir /etc/tmpfiles.d so that users don't get
> > confused by a missing directory.
> >
> > How would you suggest I avoid this QA warning?
>
> We can change the check to be for installing files within the directory?
Works for me. Note that keepdir actually installs a dotfile,
(.keep-${CATEGORY}_${PN}-${SLOT}), so we would want to exclude that.
Also, systemd-tmpfiles looks for *.conf and ignores other files, so we
could probably ignore them too.
Maybe something like this:
files=( "${ED}"/etc/tmpfiles.d/*.conf )
if [[ ${#files[@]} -gt 0 ]]; then
...
> >
> >> 2) Check whether packages inherit tmpfiles.eclass if they're
> >> installing files to /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d.
> >>
> >> (This helps to catch packages not calling tmpfiles_process
> >> in pkg_postinst).
> >
> > sys-apps/systemd installs many files in /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d, but
> > calling tmpfiles_process would probably not make much sense.
> >
> > How would you suggest I avoid this QA warning?
> >
>
> We'll probably hardcode a list of folks who need to do this:
> - sys-libs/pam
> - sys-apps/systemd
> (I'll check for any others, but I don't believe there are any now).
>
> How about that?
I'm not crazy about hard-coding package names inside a QA check.
Personally, I would prefer a magic variable I could set to disable the
check from the ebuild side.
