Hello - just noticed the scope of this list:
"This mailing list provides a discussion forum for RPM packaging
standards and practices for Fedora."
Apologies for the post - I think I Googled for rpm mailinglist, and
ended up here.
Still, does anyone know the answer....? :)
Living in hope,
On 20 May 2011 09:37, Calum<caluml(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello all,
> I am rolling my own RPM to provide the correct sudoers config for the
> company where I'm working.
> I want it to archive the existing /etc/sudoers, and put down the company's one.
> However, when I install it, I get:file /etc/sudoers from install of
> sudo-config-20110520-1.noarch conflicts with file from package
> There are two ways around it that I know:
> 1. Put the file down as /etc/sudoers.companyname, and mv it in the %post
> 2. Unpackage sudo, modify, and re-package.
> I prefer not to do 2, as that will require keeping a close eye on the
> security errata of the package, and repackaging every time a new
> version is released. I'd rather keep the upstream package untouched,
> and just apply my config over the top.
> 1 works fine - however, it breaks the rpm -V functionality, which in
> my eyes is a big plus point for using RPMs.
> Installing with --replacefiles will work - however - however, I want
> to deploy the package with Puppet, and it doesn't seem to allow
> specifying that.
> Is there a way to create the RPM in such a way that --replacefiles is
> "built-in" to the RPM?
> Is there any other way of doing this - so that rpm -V works?
packaging mailing list