incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <>
Subject Re: [ASF40][QA] AWSAPI packging remarks
Date Tue, 09 Oct 2012 00:59:57 GMT
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Frank Zhang <> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Edison asked me last Friday if I could take a look at applying this commit for
>> Debian as well:
>> cloudstack.git;a=commitdiff;h=595ab41de6bee4115300c046c17628934cb4a35
>> a
>> I'm looking into this right now and I noticed we don't even package the
>> AWSAPI files for Debian? I didn't notice since I never worked with this API
>> before.
>> I checked out the cloud.spec file and I noticed:
>> %pre aws-api
>> id %{name} > /dev/null 2>&1 || /usr/sbin/useradd -M -c "CloudStack
>> unprivileged user" \
>>       -r -s /bin/sh -d %{_sharedstatedir}/%{name}/management %{name}||
>> true
>> # set max file descriptors for cloud user to 4096 sed -i /"cloud hard nofile"/d
>> /etc/security/limits.conf sed -i /"cloud soft nofile"/d /etc/security/limits.conf
>> echo "cloud hard nofile 4096" >> /etc/security/limits.conf echo "cloud soft
>> nofile 4096" >> /etc/security/limits.conf rm -
>> rf %{_localstatedir}/cache/%{name} # user harcoded here, also hardcoded
>> on wscript
>> Here we have a RPM package touching the "limits.conf" file on a system
>> without notifying the sysadmin? What if this file was managed by for
>> example Puppet?
>> Imho we should _not_ these files but add a remark to the documentation or
>> throw a warning somewhere.
>> I'll start packaging the AWSAPI files for Debian, but I'm not planning on
>> adding this to any postinst/preinst files for the Debian packages.
>> I'm assuming this is some sort of legacy from the past somewhere?
>> One question remains though: How come that QA never picked up that there
>> is no Debian packaging at all for AWSAPI? Or did I miss this?
>> I found CLOUDSTACK-257, but that doesn't seem to mention anything about
>> Debian or Ubuntu?
> The way packaging AWSAPI is definitely wrong, it's there only because the tight schedule
forced me
> to use this dirty hack at that moment.
> %pre %post should never be used to install files as any changes in these sections are
out of control RPM system,
> it will leave stale data in system when doing "rpm -e" or "yum erase".
> So for Debian please forget these nasty hooks, just package them as what we do normally
for packaging.

Can we at least get bugs filed for all of these issues?


View raw message