Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 647834

Summary: Consider addition of %verify(not md5 size mtime) to configuration files
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: Eduard Benes <ebenes>
Component: nssAssignee: Elio Maldonado Batiz <emaldona>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Aleš Mareček <amarecek>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 6.0CC: amarecek, hkario, rrelyea
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: nss-3.12.9-1.el6 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-19 14:03:49 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Eduard Benes 2010-10-29 16:00:26 UTC
RPM verify test fails after installation due to changed configuration files. I would suggest just to add "%verify(not md5 size mtime)" as we do in RHEL 5 spec file. 

Current RHEL 6 spec file (nss-3.12.8-1.el6_0.src.rpm.spec): 
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/cert8.db
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/key3.db
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/secmod.db
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/cert9.db
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/key4.db
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/pkcs11.txt


RHEL 5 spec:
%config(noreplace) %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/cert8.db
%config(noreplace) %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/key3.db
%config(noreplace) %verify(not md5 size mtime) %{_sysconfdir}/pki/nssdb/secmod.db

Steps to reproduce:
# rpm -qV nss-sysinit nss
.......T.  c /etc/pki/nssdb/pkcs11.tx
..5......  c /etc/pki/nssdb/secmod.db

Comment 1 Elio Maldonado Batiz 2010-10-29 16:23:24 UTC
Edward, Could you explain to me what the "%verify(not md5 size mtime)" part does?

Comment 2 Eduard Benes 2010-10-29 16:40:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Edward, Could you explain to me what the "%verify(not md5 size mtime)" part
> does?

Rather than introduce some misunderstanding I'll try to forward following docs which explain it quite nicely:

  http://www.rpm.org/max-rpm-snapshot/s1-rpm-inside-files-list-directives.html#S3-RPM-INSIDE-FLIST-VERIFY-DIRECTIVE

Comment 6 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 14:03:49 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-2011-0692.html