Eric Sandeen schrieb:
> On 02 Aug 2001 09:59:48 -0500, Steve Lord wrote:
> > The 1.0.1 install package does not have a redhat equivalent, they did
> > not respin their iso images when they released a 2.4.3 based kernel rpm,
> > the only way for a redhat user to get to this configuration was a 7.1
> > install followed by a kernel rpm upgrade. It seems like we should have
> > stuck to the same path.
> Ah, hindsight is great, isn't it? :(
> > Eric, which kernel is running when the installer is doing it's stuff, it
> > is possible there is something about this kernel. In the meantime, I am
> > not sure we should leave the 1.0.1 iso images up on the web site but
> > recommend people use the 1.0 and then do a kernel upgrade. This means
> > the installer fixes get lost, but it may be the most prudent path
> > here.
> The Red Hat 2.4.3 + XFS kernel is running at install time, so I guess
> that's where this problem comes from. Hm, might be time to come up with
/etc/rc.d/init.d/functions keeps umask sane at 022 but when booting with
linux init=/bin/sh the umask is 000. I'm not an expert but I guess this
is the dangerous 'feature' :(
> a script to fix this up, and a "warning" email to users... Darn.
> I could do a 1.0.1a kernel with this bug fixed, and respin the
> installer, too, I suppose.
If you're doing so, could you please include my modified RPM's:
My previous mail:
> Eric Sandeen XFS for Linux http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
> sandeen@xxxxxxx SGI, Inc.