You are not logged in.

#1 2019-07-01 12:28:55

oxwivi
Member
Registered: 2019-07-01
Posts: 25

Does Arch have a standard convention of how software are packaged?

I'm installing Arch for the first time, so I'm completely unfamiliar with its model besides the passing knowledge I heard before getting into it.

One of the things I noticed was that the sudo package did not create a sudo group, but cups package certainly created a cups. Is this in violation of standard packaging procedure of Arch's or intentionally so? I ask because /etc/sudoers does have a commented line about a sudo group yet the package does not do nothing in that regard. cups on the other hand documents using the cups group on the Wiki and helpfully registers its group at the same time.

Offline

#2 2019-07-01 13:01:52

Allan
Member
From: Brisbane, AU
Registered: 2007-06-09
Posts: 10,904
Website

Re: Does Arch have a standard convention of how software are packaged?

A sudo group is not necessary and no file are owned by it.  The cups package does have files owned by the cups group so it needs created.

Offline

#3 2019-07-01 13:17:33

ayekat
Member
Registered: 2011-01-17
Posts: 1,356
Website

Re: Does Arch have a standard convention of how software are packaged?

Also, above that commented out line for the `sudo` group, there is a similar one for the `wheel` group (which is already created by the systemd package; see /usr/lib/sysusers.d/basic.conf).

I'm not quite sure how the `sudo` group came to be (or what the underlying semantics is), but so far I've only seen Debian and derivatives use that group, whereas other distributions appear to stick to `wheel`.


{,META,RE}PKGBUILDSpacman-hacks (includes makemetapkg and remakepkg) │ dotfiles

Offline

#4 2019-07-01 15:12:45

oxwivi
Member
Registered: 2019-07-01
Posts: 25

Re: Does Arch have a standard convention of how software are packaged?

Huh, I didn't know about wheel. I either used Debian-family distros or didn't need to touch the file.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB