Re: Restoring GNATS database

[Mel Hatzis]

On 04/15/2004 08:56 AM, Chad Walstrom submitted:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 04:09:48PM +0200, Yngve Svendsen wrote:
>
> > > > Yes, GNATS normally run as a specially created "gnats" user.
> > > > However, I think that root access was required to administer that
> > > > GNATS and Gnatsweb installation.
> > > >  

I believe 'root' access isn't necessary for GNATS provided you have the
following things setup prior to installation:

  - (x)inetd
  - a 'gnats' user/group on the server
  - an install directory owned by gnats:gnats

> > If we get a properly maintained Debian package, as looks likely now, 
> > with Chad's efforts, that would be the way to do it. I am still pretty 
> > sure we would need root access, though.
>
>
> There's nothing magical about root with respect to gnatsweb or gnats.
> Without Mel's patches, gnatsd runs from (x)inetd, and gnatsweb runs as
> the apache user (www-data on Debian).  gnatsweb-site.pl can be linked
> into /usr/lib/cgi-bin from anywhere and given any permissions we need.

Indeed....and even with my patches, you can still run GNATS this way,
both for the flat-file backend as well as the database backend.

[ Running gnatsd via (x)inetd with a database backend though isn't
advisable, given the database connection cost for each client request. ]

> Additionally, fencepost admins can give us sudo access for those
> components we need access to.

Agreed.

> > I think we ought to push hard to get this on fencepost, because that
> > is really where this belongs. If that proves hard, I should be able to
> > host it on one of the Debian boxes in my own basement. It is currently
> > hooked up to a 1600/512 ADSL connection with a fixed IP address.
>
>
> Likewise.  I'm gearing up an older Ultrasparc 5 to be my 'Net server to
> be colocated in a friend's basement (with a dedicated DSL connection).
> Additionally, I have a friend who's hosting my current domains and
> wouldn't have any problem with hosting a gnats database.  (I need to
> donate a bit for his new server anyway.)
>
> In other words, we shouldn't resort to paying some virtual hosting
> services just yet.  Between Yngve, myself, and FSF there should be
> plenty of network resources to leverage.

Sounds good.

-Mel