From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-io0-f172.google.com (mail-io0-f172.google.com [209.85.223.172]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D999860119 for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 17:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f172.google.com with SMTP id v96so90731546ioi.0 for ; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:17:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fPsM5IFN6PO297VnoMML9biwcdqJhRQlJsN0++BFOCc=; b=JfT2x9JH2ExM9PbcXzwyUt6u8Ob5hYSv3GPAUUi1QYFoziejdAL6LiFYx2e1CxYPfl eXAfErfLDGI1Szf1f+Og0VeCAfsUS/xq1mEhTjuQ76MITHiajBM2x85XjahSguPKWzv/ k5dxs2IHnrraAnEdewE0uqYRTVbJ9qnUkFhtpdswUVWR3Ug8sq2k8QQZ8WO+FpfWvFhT wDasnRBHtYSBa92yF/X1fNcr8kSadmdSoDcIe8NYqI/WFYMjHOY/rX4xhh0Du/kljjnd cbLYiiM6BclWuw5qevohZnj+bD0X22M1TMGGHz9G/fRRENgd3A4ZO0QnMLcvtTr4EE/E mQuw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:organization:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fPsM5IFN6PO297VnoMML9biwcdqJhRQlJsN0++BFOCc=; b=k5SiAfijXuzxJWjnyNcqR4MjzTliKs+Vj6k+Aw4HjNCKLRWhXRT4F61zXm8Kzt9Y3E 0XG2Jci5x9H2N3Ww/LeK/WyKgxJEQ1HQa0S1n4GMHi+QlDMICZBAtrTGxkJZsALk6fXb +Tq84w9zYQhpg12EQCLlTvTpYZvnIVs6FU4/sgzLI8kLymXJPwEoFCg/refH1szfP57F aSr7DE0XcFqX1/TyggknMwNhh9WxiLgvih+Fl8vgd6CPGn0Z2kElnJxoyzs5gxu+fYUo wIl3NGJZ8MsFgnaGRCdpM6N3XacUxDGk6aBQ4w3iZfkjJv0yzTUR3EbtbesHpz3kmx18 mHAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLYnc2WzbKaOmqSitRE91Ms6F2h8y/Z+eqO8eCiTgxgveABYfyPbMplPdCyu+7Jq7IF X-Received: by 10.107.166.18 with SMTP id p18mr7206244ioe.15.1486055853308; Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:17:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from pohly-mobl1 (p5DE8E270.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [93.232.226.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m196sm1194193iom.14.2017.02.02.09.17.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Feb 2017 09:17:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1486055849.14889.52.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly To: Seebs Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:17:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20170202111201.3fcee3fa@seebsdell> References: <1486031880.14889.35.camel@intel.com> <20170202102105.07a3bb91@seebsdell> <1486053547.14889.50.camel@intel.com> <20170202111201.3fcee3fa@seebsdell> Organization: Intel GmbH, Dornacher Strasse 1, D-85622 Feldkirchen/Munich X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1+b1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: OpenEmbedded Subject: Re: host-user-contaminated QA check X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:17:36 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 11:12 -0600, Seebs wrote: > > But I find mapping to root:root more attractive because it makes > > packaging simpler (less worries about accidentally copying the > > original uid) and the builds faster (no need to run the QA check). > > Hmm. I think I would rather have the QA check, because if a file's > supposed to be non-root, and ends up root instead, that could cause > subtle problems, but we'd no longer have a way to *detect* those > problems. But that's not the kind of the problem detected by the QA check, is it? It warns when the owner of the file is the same as the user who did the build, but because root isn't (normally) used for building, files accidentally owned by root on the target won't trigger the warning. -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.