fedora-atomic discussion point: /usr/lib/passwd
jzeleny at redhat.com
Mon Apr 14 08:43:33 UTC 2014
On 11. 4. 2014 at 17:08:49, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr at volny.cz> wrote:
> > So, having /usr/lib/passwd storing the same limited set of data is
> > not the right long-term thing. Unfortunately, AFAIK the fuller
> > interface isn't ready yet.
> Yeah, it'd be nice to merge the accountsservice database in to the
> system db. (And in general, have more consolidation among
> > In the really-long-term, really-hand-wavy, future, I think we need to
> > move away from the 32-bit UIDs,
> I agree:
> >  Overall I'm strongly convinced that the fully-stateless ==
> > fully-atomic-updates model is simply unworkable. We can have
> > stateless/atomic software installation, but we absolutely do need to
> > allow for arbitrary operations to be done on system's state between
> > loading the new version on disk and starting it. Fedora-atomic can
> > have special support for a few classes of state know in advance, but
> > fully general software needs fully general post-installation
> > adjustments. (E.g., where does ALTER TABLE ADD COLUMN on software
> > upgrade fit in the Fedora-atomic model?)
> An ExecStartPre= entry in the systemd unit.
I will play devil's advocate here:
1) What if I don't use systemd to start whatever program needs the updated
data? (might not be a daemon for example)
2) Wouldn't that start the migration script every time the daemon starts?
Doesn't sound like a pretty solution.
More information about the devel