net-im/slack: version bump, wrt 713094 #15543
Conversation
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.89, Repoman-2.3.20 Signed-off-by: Vladimir Pavljuchenkov <spiderx@spiderx.dp.ua>
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/716638 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/713094 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.89, Repoman-2.3.20 Signed-off-by: Vladimir Pavljuchenkov <spiderx@spiderx.dp.ua>
Pull Request assignmentSubmitter: @SpiderX net-im/slack: @SpiderX, @gentoo/proxy-maint Linked bugsIn order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append Docs: Code of Conduct ● Copyright policy (expl.) ● Devmanual ● GitHub PRs ● Proxy-maint guide |
gentoo-bot
added
self-maintained
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2020-04-27 10:01 UTC There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question: |
| @@ -82,7 +84,8 @@ src_install() { | |||
|
|
|||
| insinto /opt/slack | |||
| doins -r usr/lib/slack/. | |||
| fperms +x /opt/slack/slack | |||
| for i in $(echo -n "${QA_PREBUILT}") ; do fperms +x "$i" ; done | |||
| use suid && fperms u+s /opt/slack/chrome-sandbox # wrt 713094 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it do any harm if you always unconditionally just applied this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't like to have suid binaries on my system, but upstream provides them.
Personally for myself the only reason to have suid USE flag is having a possibility to unset it. On my system slack works fine without suid bit.
And the only reason why I am introducing it now is 713094. It looks like it is needed on some systems.
Another point to have it — do not make "silent bad surprise" for other users who may not like suid binaries too, especially without need.
We can remove use flag and just warn users via einfo/elog about that change for two-three ebuild bumps and remove einfo/elog after all.
No description provided.