What user does apt-get install software under?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I just installed some software using apt-get
, and its owner and group is "logger". Since I installed the software using sudo
, why isn't the owner and group "root"? I am pretty sure about a year ago, I renamed user pi
with the new name logger
. Could this have caused it, and if so, why?
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr | grep local
drwxrwsr-x 12 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 local
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 32
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:47 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo apt-get install test-client
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
test-utils
The following NEW packages will be installed:
test-client test-utils
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,575 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
test-utils test-client
Install these packages without verification? [y/N] y
Selecting previously unselected package test-utils.
(Reading database ... 41030 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../test-utils_0.1.1-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Selecting previously unselected package test-client.
Preparing to unpack .../test-client_0.1.2-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
Setting up test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Setting up test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 40
drwxrwxr-x 6 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-client
drwxrwxr-x 3 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-utils
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/passwd | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
michael:x:1001:1001:,,,:/home/michael:/bin/bash
_apt:x:109:65534::/nonexistent:/bin/false
logger:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/logger:/bin/bash
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/group | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:
michael:x:1001:
wireshark:x:114:michael
logger:x:1000:
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers
#
# This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root.
#
# Please consider adding local content in /etc/sudoers.d/ instead of
# directly modifying this file.
#
# See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file.
#
Defaults env_reset
Defaults mail_badpass
Defaults secure_path="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin"
# Host alias specification
# User alias specification
# Cmnd alias specification
# User privilege specification
root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
michael ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
anton ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# Allow members of group sudo to execute any command
%sudo ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# See sudoers(5) for more information on "#include" directives:
#includedir /etc/sudoers.d
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /etc/sudoers.d
total 8
-r--r----- 1 root root 27 Oct 18 2016 010_pi-nopasswd
-r--r----- 1 root root 958 Jan 11 2016 README
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/*
pi ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
#
# As of Debian version 1.7.2p1-1, the default /etc/sudoers file created on
# installation of the package now includes the directive:
#
# #includedir /etc/sudoers.d
#
# This will cause sudo to read and parse any files in the /etc/sudoers.d
# directory that do not end in '~' or contain a '.' character.
#
# Note that there must be at least one file in the sudoers.d directory (this
# one will do), and all files in this directory should be mode 0440.
#
# Note also, that because sudoers contents can vary widely, no attempt is
# made to add this directive to existing sudoers files on upgrade. Feel free
# to add the above directive to the end of your /etc/sudoers file to enable
# this functionality for existing installations if you wish!
#
# Finally, please note that using the visudo command is the recommended way
# to update sudoers content, since it protects against many failure modes.
# See the man page for visudo for more information.
#
michael@rp3:~ $
debian permissions apt sudo users
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I just installed some software using apt-get
, and its owner and group is "logger". Since I installed the software using sudo
, why isn't the owner and group "root"? I am pretty sure about a year ago, I renamed user pi
with the new name logger
. Could this have caused it, and if so, why?
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr | grep local
drwxrwsr-x 12 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 local
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 32
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:47 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo apt-get install test-client
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
test-utils
The following NEW packages will be installed:
test-client test-utils
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,575 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
test-utils test-client
Install these packages without verification? [y/N] y
Selecting previously unselected package test-utils.
(Reading database ... 41030 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../test-utils_0.1.1-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Selecting previously unselected package test-client.
Preparing to unpack .../test-client_0.1.2-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
Setting up test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Setting up test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 40
drwxrwxr-x 6 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-client
drwxrwxr-x 3 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-utils
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/passwd | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
michael:x:1001:1001:,,,:/home/michael:/bin/bash
_apt:x:109:65534::/nonexistent:/bin/false
logger:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/logger:/bin/bash
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/group | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:
michael:x:1001:
wireshark:x:114:michael
logger:x:1000:
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers
#
# This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root.
#
# Please consider adding local content in /etc/sudoers.d/ instead of
# directly modifying this file.
#
# See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file.
#
Defaults env_reset
Defaults mail_badpass
Defaults secure_path="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin"
# Host alias specification
# User alias specification
# Cmnd alias specification
# User privilege specification
root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
michael ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
anton ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# Allow members of group sudo to execute any command
%sudo ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# See sudoers(5) for more information on "#include" directives:
#includedir /etc/sudoers.d
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /etc/sudoers.d
total 8
-r--r----- 1 root root 27 Oct 18 2016 010_pi-nopasswd
-r--r----- 1 root root 958 Jan 11 2016 README
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/*
pi ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
#
# As of Debian version 1.7.2p1-1, the default /etc/sudoers file created on
# installation of the package now includes the directive:
#
# #includedir /etc/sudoers.d
#
# This will cause sudo to read and parse any files in the /etc/sudoers.d
# directory that do not end in '~' or contain a '.' character.
#
# Note that there must be at least one file in the sudoers.d directory (this
# one will do), and all files in this directory should be mode 0440.
#
# Note also, that because sudoers contents can vary widely, no attempt is
# made to add this directive to existing sudoers files on upgrade. Feel free
# to add the above directive to the end of your /etc/sudoers file to enable
# this functionality for existing installations if you wish!
#
# Finally, please note that using the visudo command is the recommended way
# to update sudoers content, since it protects against many failure modes.
# See the man page for visudo for more information.
#
michael@rp3:~ $
debian permissions apt sudo users
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I just installed some software using apt-get
, and its owner and group is "logger". Since I installed the software using sudo
, why isn't the owner and group "root"? I am pretty sure about a year ago, I renamed user pi
with the new name logger
. Could this have caused it, and if so, why?
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr | grep local
drwxrwsr-x 12 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 local
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 32
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:47 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo apt-get install test-client
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
test-utils
The following NEW packages will be installed:
test-client test-utils
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,575 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
test-utils test-client
Install these packages without verification? [y/N] y
Selecting previously unselected package test-utils.
(Reading database ... 41030 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../test-utils_0.1.1-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Selecting previously unselected package test-client.
Preparing to unpack .../test-client_0.1.2-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
Setting up test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Setting up test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 40
drwxrwxr-x 6 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-client
drwxrwxr-x 3 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-utils
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/passwd | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
michael:x:1001:1001:,,,:/home/michael:/bin/bash
_apt:x:109:65534::/nonexistent:/bin/false
logger:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/logger:/bin/bash
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/group | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:
michael:x:1001:
wireshark:x:114:michael
logger:x:1000:
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers
#
# This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root.
#
# Please consider adding local content in /etc/sudoers.d/ instead of
# directly modifying this file.
#
# See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file.
#
Defaults env_reset
Defaults mail_badpass
Defaults secure_path="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin"
# Host alias specification
# User alias specification
# Cmnd alias specification
# User privilege specification
root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
michael ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
anton ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# Allow members of group sudo to execute any command
%sudo ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# See sudoers(5) for more information on "#include" directives:
#includedir /etc/sudoers.d
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /etc/sudoers.d
total 8
-r--r----- 1 root root 27 Oct 18 2016 010_pi-nopasswd
-r--r----- 1 root root 958 Jan 11 2016 README
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/*
pi ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
#
# As of Debian version 1.7.2p1-1, the default /etc/sudoers file created on
# installation of the package now includes the directive:
#
# #includedir /etc/sudoers.d
#
# This will cause sudo to read and parse any files in the /etc/sudoers.d
# directory that do not end in '~' or contain a '.' character.
#
# Note that there must be at least one file in the sudoers.d directory (this
# one will do), and all files in this directory should be mode 0440.
#
# Note also, that because sudoers contents can vary widely, no attempt is
# made to add this directive to existing sudoers files on upgrade. Feel free
# to add the above directive to the end of your /etc/sudoers file to enable
# this functionality for existing installations if you wish!
#
# Finally, please note that using the visudo command is the recommended way
# to update sudoers content, since it protects against many failure modes.
# See the man page for visudo for more information.
#
michael@rp3:~ $
debian permissions apt sudo users
I just installed some software using apt-get
, and its owner and group is "logger". Since I installed the software using sudo
, why isn't the owner and group "root"? I am pretty sure about a year ago, I renamed user pi
with the new name logger
. Could this have caused it, and if so, why?
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr | grep local
drwxrwsr-x 12 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 local
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 32
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:47 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo apt-get install test-client
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
test-utils
The following NEW packages will be installed:
test-client test-utils
0 upgraded, 2 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/1,575 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
test-utils test-client
Install these packages without verification? [y/N] y
Selecting previously unselected package test-utils.
(Reading database ... 41030 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../test-utils_0.1.1-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Selecting previously unselected package test-client.
Preparing to unpack .../test-client_0.1.2-jessie_armhf.deb ...
Unpacking test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
Setting up test-utils (0.1.1-jessie) ...
Setting up test-client (0.1.2-jessie) ...
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /usr/local
total 40
drwxrwxr-x 6 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-client
drwxrwxr-x 3 logger logger 4096 Dec 23 16:49 test-utils
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Dec 23 16:49 bin
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 etc
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 games
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 include
drwxrwsr-x 4 root staff 4096 Jun 4 2017 lib
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root staff 9 Apr 10 2017 man -> share/man
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 sbin
drwxrwsr-x 7 root staff 4096 Dec 23 15:20 share
drwxrwsr-x 2 root staff 4096 Apr 10 2017 src
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/passwd | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
michael:x:1001:1001:,,,:/home/michael:/bin/bash
_apt:x:109:65534::/nonexistent:/bin/false
logger:x:1000:1000:,,,:/home/logger:/bin/bash
michael@rp3:~ $ cat /etc/group | grep 'apt|logger|root|michael'
root:x:0:
michael:x:1001:
wireshark:x:114:michael
logger:x:1000:
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers
#
# This file MUST be edited with the 'visudo' command as root.
#
# Please consider adding local content in /etc/sudoers.d/ instead of
# directly modifying this file.
#
# See the man page for details on how to write a sudoers file.
#
Defaults env_reset
Defaults mail_badpass
Defaults secure_path="/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin"
# Host alias specification
# User alias specification
# Cmnd alias specification
# User privilege specification
root ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
michael ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
anton ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# Allow members of group sudo to execute any command
%sudo ALL=(ALL:ALL) ALL
# See sudoers(5) for more information on "#include" directives:
#includedir /etc/sudoers.d
michael@rp3:~ $ ls -l /etc/sudoers.d
total 8
-r--r----- 1 root root 27 Oct 18 2016 010_pi-nopasswd
-r--r----- 1 root root 958 Jan 11 2016 README
michael@rp3:~ $ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/*
pi ALL=(ALL) NOPASSWD: ALL
#
# As of Debian version 1.7.2p1-1, the default /etc/sudoers file created on
# installation of the package now includes the directive:
#
# #includedir /etc/sudoers.d
#
# This will cause sudo to read and parse any files in the /etc/sudoers.d
# directory that do not end in '~' or contain a '.' character.
#
# Note that there must be at least one file in the sudoers.d directory (this
# one will do), and all files in this directory should be mode 0440.
#
# Note also, that because sudoers contents can vary widely, no attempt is
# made to add this directive to existing sudoers files on upgrade. Feel free
# to add the above directive to the end of your /etc/sudoers file to enable
# this functionality for existing installations if you wish!
#
# Finally, please note that using the visudo command is the recommended way
# to update sudoers content, since it protects against many failure modes.
# See the man page for visudo for more information.
#
michael@rp3:~ $
debian permissions apt sudo users
edited Dec 23 '17 at 19:02
asked Dec 23 '17 at 17:19
user1032531
518621
518621
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46
add a comment |Â
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
apt-get
, or rather dpkg
, installs package contents using whatever user is recorded as owning the various files in the package. This is typically root:root
, but can be anything; youâÂÂll commonly see root:games
in game packages, root:www-data
for certain directories in web-server-related packages, etc. (Ownership and permissions can also be set by maintainer scripts, but thatâÂÂs usually not necessary.)
If a package is created manually on a Raspberry Pi-style system, without paying too much attention to ownership (and not using fakeroot
), it would perfectly be possible to end up with a package containing files owned by pi:pi
, identified numerically. On your system, these would end up belonging to logger:logger
.
You can see the ownership information contained in a packages by using dpkg-deb -c
.
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without usingpurge
), deleted userlogger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I useddpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group ismichaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.
â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Debian packages can set file permissions and ownership in their postinst script.
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
apt-get
, or rather dpkg
, installs package contents using whatever user is recorded as owning the various files in the package. This is typically root:root
, but can be anything; youâÂÂll commonly see root:games
in game packages, root:www-data
for certain directories in web-server-related packages, etc. (Ownership and permissions can also be set by maintainer scripts, but thatâÂÂs usually not necessary.)
If a package is created manually on a Raspberry Pi-style system, without paying too much attention to ownership (and not using fakeroot
), it would perfectly be possible to end up with a package containing files owned by pi:pi
, identified numerically. On your system, these would end up belonging to logger:logger
.
You can see the ownership information contained in a packages by using dpkg-deb -c
.
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without usingpurge
), deleted userlogger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I useddpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group ismichaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.
â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
apt-get
, or rather dpkg
, installs package contents using whatever user is recorded as owning the various files in the package. This is typically root:root
, but can be anything; youâÂÂll commonly see root:games
in game packages, root:www-data
for certain directories in web-server-related packages, etc. (Ownership and permissions can also be set by maintainer scripts, but thatâÂÂs usually not necessary.)
If a package is created manually on a Raspberry Pi-style system, without paying too much attention to ownership (and not using fakeroot
), it would perfectly be possible to end up with a package containing files owned by pi:pi
, identified numerically. On your system, these would end up belonging to logger:logger
.
You can see the ownership information contained in a packages by using dpkg-deb -c
.
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without usingpurge
), deleted userlogger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I useddpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group ismichaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.
â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
apt-get
, or rather dpkg
, installs package contents using whatever user is recorded as owning the various files in the package. This is typically root:root
, but can be anything; youâÂÂll commonly see root:games
in game packages, root:www-data
for certain directories in web-server-related packages, etc. (Ownership and permissions can also be set by maintainer scripts, but thatâÂÂs usually not necessary.)
If a package is created manually on a Raspberry Pi-style system, without paying too much attention to ownership (and not using fakeroot
), it would perfectly be possible to end up with a package containing files owned by pi:pi
, identified numerically. On your system, these would end up belonging to logger:logger
.
You can see the ownership information contained in a packages by using dpkg-deb -c
.
apt-get
, or rather dpkg
, installs package contents using whatever user is recorded as owning the various files in the package. This is typically root:root
, but can be anything; youâÂÂll commonly see root:games
in game packages, root:www-data
for certain directories in web-server-related packages, etc. (Ownership and permissions can also be set by maintainer scripts, but thatâÂÂs usually not necessary.)
If a package is created manually on a Raspberry Pi-style system, without paying too much attention to ownership (and not using fakeroot
), it would perfectly be possible to end up with a package containing files owned by pi:pi
, identified numerically. On your system, these would end up belonging to logger:logger
.
You can see the ownership information contained in a packages by using dpkg-deb -c
.
edited Dec 23 '17 at 21:29
answered Dec 23 '17 at 21:00
Stephen Kitt
143k22308371
143k22308371
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without usingpurge
), deleted userlogger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I useddpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group ismichaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.
â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
add a comment |Â
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without usingpurge
), deleted userlogger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I useddpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group ismichaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.
â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without using
purge
), deleted user logger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I used dpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group is michaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is 1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
Thank you Stephen, Before getting your answer, I removed the package (with and without using
purge
), deleted user logger
, rebooted, reinstalled, and now user:group are both 1000 (old pi's and then old logger's numerically id). Then, I used dpkg-deb -c /var/cache/apt/archives/thepackage.deb
, and I see the file owner/group is michaelOnServerWhoBuiltPackage
, and as you likely expect, this user's id/groupId is 1000
. I expect/hope this is not expected behavior as it arbitrarily gives ownership of files based on chance that user's on the two machines have the same numerical user id.â user1032531
Dec 24 '17 at 14:09
1
1
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
Yes, youâÂÂre not supposed to produce packages whose files are owned by non-system users.
â Stephen Kitt
Dec 24 '17 at 14:20
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Debian packages can set file permissions and ownership in their postinst script.
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Debian packages can set file permissions and ownership in their postinst script.
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
Debian packages can set file permissions and ownership in their postinst script.
Debian packages can set file permissions and ownership in their postinst script.
answered Dec 23 '17 at 17:51
jdwolf
2,392116
2,392116
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
add a comment |Â
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
I had preinst and postinst and postrm scripts associated with the file, but they do not change the owner/group. Interesting, they too had user/group "logger". I then used apt-get to remove the package and then physically removed the pre/post inst/rm files, and finally reinstalled, and they again have the same user/group. While these type of files "can" do such a thing, they are not in my case.
â user1032531
Dec 23 '17 at 19:06
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f412700%2fwhat-user-does-apt-get-install-software-under%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
what groupid has logger on your system? maybe your group ids got mixed up
â arved
Dec 23 '17 at 19:46