[Bug 157695] CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: CAN-2005-0448 perl File::Path.pm rmtree race condition
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=157695
wtogami(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |NEEDINFO
------- Additional Comments From wtogami(a)redhat.com 2005-05-28 02:05 EST -------
"Race condition in the rmtree function in File::Path.pm in Perl before 5.8.4
allows local users to create arbitrary setuid binaries"
5.8.4 means FC3 is unaffected because we have perl-5.8.5? Can someone confirm?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 11 months
[Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl(Inline) duplication
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733
------- Additional Comments From wtogami(a)redhat.com 2005-05-25 21:13 EST -------
Rel-eng said this isn't a showstopper, so this goes into FC5. Does this
actually cause trouble beyond "two packages are pulled in when you Require
Inline"? I am guessing no, so this doesn't need to go into FC4 Updates either.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 11 months
[Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl(Inline) duplication
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733
------- Additional Comments From jpo(a)di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 19:47 EST -------
PDL: provides/requires
1) provide: perl(Inline)
Caused by the following hack in the file Inline/MakePdlppInstallable.pm
----------
package Inline::MakePdlppInstallable;
# just a dummy package
package Inline;
#====================================================================
# override the original Inline::install method
# to allow Inline::Pdlpp code to be installed
...
----------
The above comment goes on and explains why the hack is there.
2) The requirement perl(Inline) appears to be valid unless
there is no interest in using Inline::Pdlpp.
a) The Inline module is required by the module Inline::Pdlpp
(file Inline/Pdlpp.pm)
----------
package Inline::Pdlpp;
use strict;
require Inline;
...
----------
b) From the Inline::Pdlpp documentation
----------
...
You never actually use Inline::Pdlpp directly. It is just a support
module for using Inline.pm with PDL::PP. So the usage is always:
use Inline Pdlpp => ...;
...
----------
Source:
http://search.cpan.org/dist/PDL/Basic/Gen/Inline/Pdlpp.pm#Usage
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 11 months
[Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl(Inline) duplication
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733
------- Additional Comments From ville.skytta(a)iki.fi 2005-05-25 16:42 EST -------
Note that if you just filter out the perl(Inline) Provides here, this package
will after the change depend on the perl-Inline package which it did not do
earlier, because the autogenerated perl(Inline) dependency will still be there.
It should be verified if this is the right thing.
Another cosmetic note: if one hardcodes /usr/lib/rpm/perl.(prov|req) and thus
theoretically overrides the system rpmbuild configuration, the filter scripts
could be separated into files of their own instead of embedding them in the
specfile. On the other hand, since they're already embedded,
/usr/lib/rpm/perl.(prov|req) could be replaced with %{__perl_provides} and
%{__perl_requires} in the emitted scriptlets to make them automatically play
nice with possible future rpm config changes.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 11 months
[Bug 158733] perl(Inline) duplication
by Red Hat Bugzilla
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: perl(Inline) duplication
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=158733
------- Additional Comments From jpo(a)di.uminho.pt 2005-05-25 16:27 EST -------
--- perl-PDL.spec.241_11 2005-05-12 05:28:34.000000000 +0100
+++ perl-PDL.spec 2005-05-25 21:25:12.000000000 +0100
@@ -34,7 +34,15 @@
%patch0 -p1 -b .settings
%patch1 -p1 -b .long
-# Explicitly filter perl(Tk)
+# Provides: explicitly filter perl(Inline)
+cat <<__EOF__ > %{name}-findperlprovides
+#!/bin/sh
+/usr/lib/rpm/perl.prov $* | grep -v 'perl(Inline)'
+__EOF__
+%define __perl_provides %{_builddir}/PDL-%{version}/%{name}-findperlprovides
+chmod +x %{__perl_provides}
+
+# Requires: explicitly filter perl(Tk)
cat <<__EOF__ > %{name}-findperlrequires
#!/bin/sh
/usr/lib/rpm/perl.req $* | grep -v 'perl(Tk)'
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
18 years, 11 months