Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conflict with jailtest utility #4268

Closed
reinerh opened this issue May 10, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

Conflict with jailtest utility #4268

reinerh opened this issue May 10, 2021 · 6 comments
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed question_old (Deprecated; use "needinfo" or "question" instead) Further information is requested
Milestone

Comments

@reinerh
Copy link
Collaborator

reinerh commented May 10, 2021

The new jailtest utility conflicts with a utility of the same name included in uml-utilities (Debian), uml_utilities (Fedora, Arch AUR).
They are installed in the same location (/usr/bin/jailtest). This means for packaging, that a Breaks relationship needs to be declared, which means that firejail can not be co-installed with the uml-utilities package. This is very user-unfriendly and should be avoided if possible. As it has not been released yet, avoiding a conflict is still possible.

Is this tool actually needed globally? Or would it be sufficient to have it in a private directory (like /usr/lib/firejail/, where other helper tools like fldd are located)?

If the tool really is supposed to be invoked by users manually, could we think of a different name to avoid a conflict?

Alternatively I'm also considering not shipping it in the Debian package.

Any opinions?

Ping @netblue30

@reinerh reinerh added help wanted Extra attention is needed question_old (Deprecated; use "needinfo" or "question" instead) Further information is requested labels May 10, 2021
@reinerh reinerh added this to the 0.9.65 milestone May 10, 2021
@glitsj16
Copy link
Collaborator

Is this tool actually needed globally?

Personally I would answer 'yes'. Now that --audit is gone this tool is pretty nice to check running sandboxes.

If the tool really is supposed to be invoked by users manually, could we think of a different name to avoid a conflict?

firejailtest, firetest, jailcheck - just a few ideas (didn't check for any name collisions)...

@netblue30
Copy link
Owner

Thanks, I'll move it to "jailcheck". How do we check for collisions?

@kmk3
Copy link
Collaborator

kmk3 commented May 13, 2021

@glitsj16 commented 2 days ago:

firejailtest, firetest, jailcheck - just a few ideas (didn't check for any
name collisions)...

@netblue30 commented 3 hours ago:

Thanks, I'll move it to "jailcheck". How do we check for collisions?

On Arch, it can be done with with pacman -F:

$ pacman -F firejail
community/firejail 0.9.64.4-1
    usr/bin/firejail
    usr/share/bash-completion/completions/firejail
$ pacman -F jailtest firejailtest firetest jailcheck

I doesn't check the AUR though.

And according to the Pacman Rosetta, on Debian this can be done with:

apt-file search

@rusty-snake
Copy link
Collaborator

And for Fedora it is dnf provides <PROGRAM|PATH>.

$ en_US-locale dnf provides jailcheck
Error: No Matches found

@reinerh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

reinerh commented May 13, 2021

And according to the Pacman Rosetta, on Debian this can be done with:

apt-file search

Yes, that's correct. There is also no conflict in Debian:

$ apt-file search jailcheck
$

netblue30 added a commit that referenced this issue May 18, 2021
@netblue30
Copy link
Owner

jailcheck all set!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed question_old (Deprecated; use "needinfo" or "question" instead) Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants