[Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/nut: specify --with-user/group when building NUT

[Jens Maus]

Hi Yann, All,

> Am 08.06.2017 um 21:20 schrieb Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998 at free.fr>:
> 
> On 2017-06-08 17:35 +0200, Jens Maus spake thusly:
>> This commit fixes a problem where the NUT package couldn't be
>> used as a NUT server due to the fact that the default group for
>> nobody is "nogroup" and not "nobody" like the internal default
>> of NUT. Thus, when starting a NUT server daemon the daemon starts
>> with incorrect group permissions and generated some error messages.
>> This commit fixes this shortcoming by specifying --with-user/group
>> when running configure.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Maus <mail at jens-maus.de>
>> ---
>> package/nut/nut.mk | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/package/nut/nut.mk b/package/nut/nut.mk
>> index 332ccf907..ab8a17868 100644
>> --- a/package/nut/nut.mk
>> +++ b/package/nut/nut.mk
>> @@ -18,7 +18,9 @@ NUT_AUTORECONF = YES
>> # since the default location (/var/state/ups) maybe readonly.
>> NUT_CONF_OPTS = \
>> 	--with-altpidpath=/var/run/upsd \
>> -	--without-hal
>> +	--without-hal \
>> +	--with-user=nobody \
> 
> 'nobody' is the default for the user, so it does not seem to be needed
> to specify it, as we do have nobody. Being explicit is probably better.
> 
>> +	--with-group=nogroup
> 
> Yup.
> 
> Note however that nut does not recommend running as nobody/nogroup.
> 
> Instead, I would suggest we do add a user definition for nut, and
> use that for configure.
> 
>    define NUT_USER
>        nut -1 nut -1 * - - - Nut user
>    endef

Thanks for your comments. Indeed I could remove —with-user=nobody from my patchset. And of course it would be better to run NUT with a new user. But IMHO for the time being the patch I submitted should be sufficient and we can apply an additional patch later. Or is my patch rejected now and I need to rework it for being accepted? Sorry for asking, but I am fairly new to submitting patches to buildroot and I am not fully confident to the procedure. In addition, I cannot see my initial patch at patchwork anymore?!?!

regards,
jens
-- 
Jens Maus, Dresden/Germany
http://jens-maus.de/

*** Content is authentic only with digital signature  ***

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3745 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.buildroot.org/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20170610/0a08b2fb/attachment-0001.p7s>