[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

rpm -VVa errors immediately after fc7 install

I am curious why rpm verification fails on these files/packages
immediately after installation of fc7. I am leaving out some things
(especially config files) that obviously get changed during/after

Many files installed from tetex and tetex-dvips packages show changes.

SM5....T c /usr/lib/security/classpath.security
S.5....T c /usr/share/sgml/docbook/xmlcatalog

Does the install/setup process really change these files, or could the
rpms have the wrong md5s, modes, times, and file sizes?
classpath.security and xmlcatalog are listed as config files, but
would the config really change depending on how I install or how I
answer the post-install questions? I think I just took the defaults,
don't understand what would've changed.
/usr/lib/security/classpath.security is particularly boring...
 grep -v '^#'  /usr/lib/security/classpath.security



Would any of that really differ between different fc7 installs if
no-one went and mucked with them?

And then

....L... c /etc/pam.d/system-auth

L means 'readLink(2) path mismatch' whatever that means. I googled
that, but just got a lot of pages that quote the man page, no further

ls -la shows that /etc/pam.d/system-auth is actually a soft link to
/etc/pam.d/system-auth-ac. I wonder why? Is there actually something
to be concerned about here? /etc/pam.d/system-auth is supposed to come
from pam, but /etc/pam.d/system-auth-ac comes from authconfig package.
??? Is authconfig stepping on pam?

Is there a README or FAQ somewhere that should be the place to look
for answers about this sort of thing?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]