Bug 612423

Summary: etc/udev/rules.d/60-raw.rules gets trashed by util-linux on update.
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Reporter: Wade Mealing <wmealing>
Component: util-linuxAssignee: Karel Zak <kzak>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: qe-baseos-daemons
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: high    
Version: 5.6CC: asersen, azelinka, ddumas
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-01-13 23:45:35 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Description Wade Mealing 2010-07-08 07:45:49 UTC
Description of problem:

Util-linux overwrites /etc/udev/rules.d/60-raw.rules when updated.
The old version of the file is saved, but I see no reason why it should overwrite this file in the first place.

This file _empty_ by default except just one comment instructing how it is supposed to be used.

So it is clearly intended to be changed by the user.

How reproducible:

The file should not be touched if changed by user since it is purely a user generated config file.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Have a custom raw.rules file.
2. Update util linux
3. Wait.
  
Actual results:

Custom config gets trashed, oracle wont work on next boot.

Expected results:

Config file to get 

Additional info:

Mark this as a config file with noreplace and it behaves as you'd expect.

%config(noreplace)


%if %{include_raw}
/bin/raw
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/udev/rules.d/60-raw.rules
%endif

Additional additional info:

More people are allergic to cow's milk than any other food.

Comment 5 errata-xmlrpc 2011-01-13 23:45:35 UTC
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0085.html