Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: enewuser should force updates to shell and home
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:58:04
Message-Id: 4FD8E26C.9080803@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: enewuser should force updates to shell and home by Ian Stakenvicius
On 6/13/2012 2:32 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 13/06/12 02:09 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: >> On 13-06-2012 12:00:16 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >>> Hey all - I'd like to propose that enewuser forces updates to a >>> user's home dir and shell whenever it is called, so that if this >>> changes with new versions of an ebuild it is dealt with >>> automatically rather than having to modify them in >>> pkg_postinst/pkg_setup directly. > >> What if some admin purposely changed home or shell for a system >> account? Would be quite annoying if every update would reset that, >> wouldn't it? > > > > > I considered this case, and that it might be more appropriate to > duplicate 'enewuser' into a new call 'eforceuser' (or similar) which > could be used instead of 'enewuser' in cases when the currently > provided user settings should be forced. > > I decided against this as it seems also to make sense that users > created by portage should be controlled by portage. > > I suppose probably the best means of handling this would be to somehow > detect whether or not the current user settings are default and only > apply the updates if they are; however a means of doing that (which > would be transparent to the ebuild) is somewhat beyond my knowledge > and abilities. >
Just a thought: You could introduce a variable that would disable the forced updates. This could be set in make.conf by any users who prefer not to have their passwd database updated automatically.

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature