Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

2
  • Our approach had always been to prefer to symlink from directories external to the application into application files, such that each deploy not only pushes out the new application, but also any configuration file changes. Even giving the deployer the rights to deploy code outside of the application directory violates this approach - but equally having to chown an application file to be root owned post-deploy feels like a bad thing (tm) too. Perhaps the original approach therefore can no longer work nicely with logrotate 3.8.0+ Commented Sep 2, 2014 at 1:56
  • 2
    @phantomwhale Your original approach implicitly gave your deployer user full root privileges. That's not new in logrotate 3.8. If you want to restrict the deployer's rights while still allowing it to update the config, then I think you need to use something other than logrotate.
    – pelle
    Commented Sep 2, 2014 at 7:49