Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#11589 - testing/policykit 0.9-3 should use another gid instead 102 for policykit group

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Lee.MaRS (leemars) - Friday, 26 September 2008, 13:58 GMT
Last edited by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Thursday, 09 October 2008, 09:47 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Testing
Status Closed
Assigned To Jan de Groot (JGC)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:
The policykit will try to use gid 102 as policykit group. However, the gid above 100 is used by users. My personal group is 102, which is conflict with policykit.
I think policykit should use the gid below 100, which was reserved for system use.

Additional info:
* package version(s)
testing/policykit 0.9-3
* config and/or log files etc.
- pacman installation log
( 6/22) installing policykit [#####################] 100%
groupadd: GID 102 is not unique
useradd: unknown group policykit
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'
chown: invalid user: `policykit'
chown: invalid user: `policykit:policykit'
chown: invalid user: `policykit'
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'
chgrp: invalid group: `policykit'

Steps to reproduce:
This task depends upon

Closed by  Jan de Groot (JGC)
Thursday, 09 October 2008, 09:47 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Sunday, 05 October 2008, 10:36 GMT
I have this in /etc/groups:
users::100:
gdm:x:101:
stb-admin:x:102:roman
stb-admin is from system-tools-backends and was installed without specifying GID
Comment by Jan de Groot (JGC) - Thursday, 09 October 2008, 08:59 GMT
Fixed in -4 for x86_64. Can someone build this thing for i686?
Comment by Allan McRae (Allan) - Thursday, 09 October 2008, 09:38 GMT
Built for i686

Loading...