Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 340608 important
Bug#340608: fai: nfsroot should not be in /usr
Severity set to `important'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator,
severity 340608 important
thanks
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:41:18PM +0100, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> Scribit Steve Langasek dies 25/11/2005 hora 00:56:
> > > According to the FHS, ``/usr is shareable, read-only data''. So FAI
> > > should not by default try to write anything in /usr and place it's
>
Scribit Thomas Lange dies 25/11/2005 hora 17:35:
> I like to skip the move to /var/lib/fai, and wait until I can finally
> move to /srv.
But this is still a bug, and a policy violation. Users applying Debian
security guidelines will still encounter this bug with the default
configuration...
Prag
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:13:24 +0100, Pierre THIERRY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> The problem is, strictly speaking, using /srv would not be policy
> compliant, I think, because there is no mention of /srv in the currently
> included FHS. Maybe you should just usr /var/lib/fa
This one time, at band camp, Pierre THIERRY said:
> Scribit Stephen Gran dies 25/11/2005 hora 15:19:
> > My understanding is that while /srv is the right place for this kind
> > of data, it would be incorrect for Debian packages to dump stuff
> > there. /srv is the domain of the local admin.
>
>
Scribit Stephen Gran dies 25/11/2005 hora 15:19:
> My understanding is that while /srv is the right place for this kind
> of data, it would be incorrect for Debian packages to dump stuff
> there. /srv is the domain of the local admin.
This is precisely why it should be put there by fai-setup. fai
This one time, at band camp, Thomas Lange said:
> > On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:41:18 +0100, Pierre THIERRY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > said:
>
> > read-write object the user can modify and update... It belongs either to
> > /var or /srv (the latter I prefer, as it is clearly data for a se
Scribit Thomas Lange dies 25/11/2005 hora 15:34:
> My future plans are to move it to /srv, but the question is, if it's
> really a FHS violation.
nfsroot can be updated, regenerated, modified to fit the user's needs,
and so on. I don't see how it can really be seen read-only. So it can't
be in /us
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 13:41:18 +0100, Pierre THIERRY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> read-write object the user can modify and update... It belongs either to
> /var or /srv (the latter I prefer, as it is clearly data for a service
> exposed by the system).
My future plans are to
Scribit Steve Langasek dies 25/11/2005 hora 00:56:
> > According to the FHS, ``/usr is shareable, read-only data''. So FAI
> > should not by default try to write anything in /usr and place it's
> > nfsroot there. See #309554.
> Could you elaborate on why you believe this is an FHS violation?
My /u
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:56:17 -0800, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> Could you elaborate on why you believe this is an FHS violation? Is the
fai
> nfsroot not shareable, or is it not read-only? (I would expect an nfsroot
> image to be both...)
The FAI nfsroot
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 03:19:08PM +0100, Pierre THIERRY wrote:
> Package: fai
> Version: 2.8.4
> Severity: serious
> Justification: FHS
> According to the FHS, ``/usr is shareable, read-only data''. So FAI
> should not by default try to write anything in /usr and place it's
> nfsroot there. See #
Package: fai
Version: 2.8.4
Severity: serious
Justification: FHS
According to the FHS, ``/usr is shareable, read-only data''. So FAI
should not by default try to write anything in /usr and place it's
nfsroot there. See #309554.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers
13 matches
Mail list logo
