Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> Kai Schaetzl wrote on Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:00:48 +0100:
>
>
>> I wonder now if the owner of
>> that directory should actually be named?
>>
>
> Hm, after looking on other machines that have named installed but not in
> use it's excactly the same there. So, if named wants write permission
> there, but the rpm always removes that permission - isn't the rpm wrong
> then? Should I report this as a bug?
>
On my system, named does not have write permission to the named
directory, but it does have permission to named/data.
# ll /var/named/chroot/var/
total 24
drwxr-x--- 4 root named 4096 Aug 25 2004 named
drwxrwx--- 3 root named 4096 Mar 13 2003 run
drwxrwx--- 2 named named 4096 Mar 13 2003 tmp
# ll /var/named/chroot/var/named/
total 16
drwxrwx--- 5 named named 4096 Sep 25 14:25 data
drwxrwx--- 2 named named 4096 Jul 27 2004 slaves
Everything is working fine for me with these settings, so I don't think
this is a problem.
--
Bowie