Bug 114620 - [patch] ldconfig barfs in trigger script
Summary: [patch] ldconfig barfs in trigger script
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: cracklib
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nalin Dahyabhai
QA Contact: Brian Brock
Keywords: EasyFix
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2004-01-30 10:41 UTC by Nils Philippsen
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:10 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-01-30 16:55:56 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)
patch to the spec file correcting the trigger script (508 bytes, patch)
2004-01-30 10:43 UTC, Nils Philippsen
no flags Details | Diff

Description Nils Philippsen 2004-01-30 10:41:19 UTC
Description of problem:

ldconfig in the trigger script barfs on RPM passing it the $1 parameter

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

When upgrading from a smaller version to this one.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Upgrade from a smaller version of cracklib to this one.
Actual results:

ldconfig complains about a relative path "2" passed to it -- this is
the $1 parameter RPM passes to pre/post/trigger scripts

Expected results:

no error, ldconfig running flawlessly

Additional info:

will attach patch to spec file

Comment 1 Nils Philippsen 2004-01-30 10:43:09 UTC
Created attachment 97365 [details]
patch to the spec file correcting the trigger script

Comment 2 Matthias Saou 2004-09-01 12:25:13 UTC
Just wondering : What is this trigger useful for? From what I
understand, it will run /sbin/ldconfig when cracklib < 2.7-24 is
uninstalled, which means when upgrading from cracklib < 2.7-24 since
this is from a more recent cracklib package... but this cracklib
package has /sbin/ldconfig calls in %post and %postun...
I would understand its usefulness if the last /sbin/ldconfig call done
during the upgrade from the various %pre*/%post* scriplets was made
while files of the older package were still installed, but that isn't
the case if the older package had /sbin/ldconfig in its %postun, or is
it exactly that it's lacking?

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.