1 |
On 11-04-2007 15:55:56 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: |
2 |
> What if we use "$PORTAGE_INST_UID:$PORTAGE_INST_GID" where currently |
3 |
> "root:0" is used. |
4 |
> On native Gentoo-Linux, these are set to "0:0" in /etc/make.globals. |
5 |
> Note that I did not find PORTAGE_INST_USER here - is this an extension |
6 |
> of prefix-portage ? |
7 |
|
8 |
Eh yes. |
9 |
|
10 |
But ehm... the problem here is that prefix itself has nothing to do with |
11 |
dropping privileges. We just drop privileges, because there is no |
12 |
reason to have them in a prefix (except for things like ping or |
13 |
traceroute maybe). Hence, prefix has nothing to do with users and |
14 |
permissions here. It is a side-effect which is very much desirable (to |
15 |
me) but actually getting in the way now. |
16 |
|
17 |
> For using prefix as 'root', set them to '0:0' too, and when using prefix |
18 |
> as user, set them to '<myuid>:<mygid>'. Portage has some configure-args |
19 |
> to set the defaults into installed make.defaults IIRC. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Don't know on how to do with "root:man" and the like: |
22 |
> |
23 |
> If being used as 'root', creating users and groups might be possible, |
24 |
> but I'm unsure if it makes sense at all, as the uid's and gid's of |
25 |
> existing users/groups may vary. |
26 |
|
27 |
I think this is just manual "userwork" of getting it right. I don't |
28 |
believe common sense or global variables can help here. It's too much |
29 |
of a border case here. |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
Fabian Groffen |
33 |
Gentoo on a different level |
34 |
|
35 |
-- |
36 |
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list |