[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] User/group packages: the masterplan
From:       Michał_Górny <mgorny () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2019-06-20 13:15:22
Message-ID: 87e254a48efe3fcb34825c3033c4b8bf4041432b.camel () gentoo ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


On Thu, 2019-06-20 at 09:07 -0400, Brian Evans wrote:
> On 6/18/2019 7:31 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > 3. Give people some time for wider testing.
> > 
> > At this point, the new eclasses would be non-binding, i.e. you will
> > still be able to commit new packages using user.eclass old style.
> > The eclasses would be bound with usual eclass stability requirements,
> > i.e. some API changes may happen if necessary.
> > 
> > 4. If no major issues arise, submit GLEP 81 for formal approval.
> > 
> > Once GLEP 81 is formally approved, using user.eclass directly becomes
> > deprecated and new packages are expected to use acct-*/*.
> > 
> 
> I object to this as some packages just need a user/group for a single
> daemon that is not shared with another package.  The numbering does not
> really matter in this case as it will never leave the machine.
> 
> user.eclass should exist for this purpose and the acct-{group/user}
> should exist for static purposes which I find to be rather rare.
> 

You should read the relevant discussion.  The use cases for fixed
UIDs/GIDs go beyond sharing users/groups.  Most notably, they involve
sharing filesystems, archives etc.  I'm aware those things can't work
reliably today but that's no reason to prevent users from trying to get
them working in the future.


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]