On 10.05.2007 22:38, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wednesday 25 April 2007, I wrote:
> The first draft about user and group handling (creation etc) is ready for
> discussion: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/UsersAndGroups
As noted in this week's FPC meeting minutes, the draft is probably going to be
voted on next week. A more fleshed out and cleaned up version which also
takes into account some findings in the FPC meeting as well as other feedback
on -maintainers is now online. Comments still welcome.
Thx for writing this up; some comments (if they were discussed already
then sorry for the noise):
I'd like to see clarifications somewhere for which existing branches we
applies this/what it means to existing packages that use some magic
tools to create users and groups currently.
This probably should be tracked in a separate document, to not mix up
"general good packaging standards" with packaging in practice for
What does this guideline mean for former Core packages that create
groups and users hardcoded GIDs/UIDs?
"User accounts created by packages are rarely used for interactive
logons, and should thus generally use /sbin/nologin as the user's shell."
What about those core packages that don't follow this? My system has some:
netdump:x:34:34:Network Crash Dump user:/var/crash:/bin/bash
I suspect there are more in former Core packages. Do they have a good
reason for their doings maybe? Should that be handled by the Guideline?
Just wondering: Should we have some kind of "user/gid registry" in the
wiki to track packages that create users/groups? Then sysadmins could
create a fedora-meta-users-and-groups package in their private repo that
creates all the users and groups that Fedora packages might create
beforeband with static numbers; that workaround could be of interest for
sysadmins that want to have the same UIDs/GIDs everywhere.