Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

/var/cache/salt installed 755 by deb, not installed by rpm; causes commands/clients to fail #14768

Closed
dmick opened this issue Aug 5, 2014 · 10 comments · Fixed by #14761
Closed
Assignees
Labels
Bug broken, incorrect, or confusing behavior Packaging Related to packaging of Salt, not Salt's support for package management.
Milestone

Comments

@dmick
Copy link

dmick commented Aug 5, 2014

Accessing the master through client.LocalClient fails even when the user is in the ACL list, but only on RPM systems

The root of the problem is that /var/cache/salt is created by the Debian packaging (as mode 0755), but is not created by the RPM packaging, and the master running as root creates the dirs as 770.

I'm not sure of the correct fix, but it seems like individual files in /var/cache/salt are carefully permission-managed, so perhaps the right answer is to add /var/cache/salt to the RPM packaging?

@dmick
Copy link
Author

dmick commented Aug 5, 2014

@terminalmage forrest in #salt said to tag you on this one; I can easily make the change but it might require some design/thought

@terminalmage
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, it's easier to create the package with those permissions. Files and directories will be created with the permissions from the umask otherwise.

@dmick
Copy link
Author

dmick commented Aug 5, 2014

I said ACL list. (hangs head in shame)

@terminalmage
Copy link
Contributor

Hahahaha

@basepi
Copy link
Contributor

basepi commented Aug 6, 2014

As long as you don't say "PIN number" we can still be friends. ;)

@terminalmage
Copy link
Contributor

@dmick I accidentally closed this from an external tool when I closed the pull request I had opened to update the RPM spec file. I'm going to leave this issue closed though, since the new builds with /var/cache/salt in them have been submitted as epel-testing candidates.

Thanks for reporting!

@dmick
Copy link
Author

dmick commented Aug 6, 2014

OK. Thanks for the update.

@ChristinaMeno
Copy link

@terminalmage I am looking for this fix in any of the latest releases and can't seem to find it. Is this intentional?
git tag --contains 5f99316
nothing
git branch --contains 5f99316
develop

Is this intentional ?

@basepi
Copy link
Contributor

basepi commented Sep 12, 2014

@GregMeno 2014.1 doesn't get merged forward into the other branches. Thus, the commit SHA will be different in those branches. I expect that @terminalmage made the change separately in those branches. I'll check with him.

@terminalmage
Copy link
Contributor

@GregMeno: @basepi is correct. We pretty much just keep the spec file up to date in develop. However, the current build in EPEL contains this fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug broken, incorrect, or confusing behavior Packaging Related to packaging of Salt, not Salt's support for package management.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants