| 1 |
On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 10:40:20 AM EST Michael Mol wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Highly detailed lists like that--used as a broad standard--are a bad idea. |
| 5 |
> They represent a single synchronization point that everyone must adhere to. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
That is a statement based on opinion. You say it is a bad idea. I say it is |
| 8 |
necessary and needed. Otherwise wrt to Gentoo ebuilds can stomp on each other. |
| 9 |
Using same GID or UID in more than one ebuild causing problems. There has to |
| 10 |
be something know so others do not use ones others are already. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> That means that every prospective adjustment to the list requires active |
| 13 |
> maintenance. That means that for every new daemon someone writes, they have |
| 14 |
> to go through an admissions process. For every contentious fork of a |
| 15 |
> project, you risk conflict over who the designated contact for the |
| 16 |
> assignment should be. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
If they package such in Gentoo someone is making a call as to what UID and GID |
| 19 |
should be used. If you think about it from packaging said new daemon in |
| 20 |
Gentoo, it is a MUST. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
If it does not exist, should it be entirely random from the packager |
| 23 |
perspective? What if they use a GID/UID specific to them and not others. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
There has to be some standard some consistency in Gentoo. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> It adds a large bureaucratic load on everyone. Every itch some developer |
| 28 |
> thinks about scratching has to be weighed against engaging with some |
| 29 |
> process- laden entity. Maybe they'll participate, but they likely won't. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Gentoo shines at bureaucratic load. That may be one of the only things Gentoo |
| 32 |
is really good at, needless bureaucratic loads that just slow things down and |
| 33 |
fracture the community, exherbo, funtoo, and likely others... |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
This is not needless bureaucracy , this is necessary. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Have you watched the IANA ports assignment registry over the years? Consider |
| 38 |
> how many services and tools you've seen that *don't* respect it. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Yes, how often to ports < 1024 change? Hardly ever.... Proving the exact point |
| 41 |
why this is needed. People can change them themselves but 99% of the time its |
| 42 |
to some other port > 1024. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Why is there IANA port assignment registry in the first place? Likely for a |
| 45 |
similar reason. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> All of this is why we use identity management tools like LDAP in the first |
| 48 |
> place. Heck, it's why we have passwd and group files for mapping names to |
| 49 |
> ids and didn't simply hardcode system IDs decades ago. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
LDAP typical manages user accounts not system. If the LDAP server is not |
| 52 |
reachable you would make a system completely nonfunctional if it relied on |
| 53 |
LDAP for system accounts. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Also needed from a file sharing stand point of view if sharing parts of a |
| 56 |
system across others. You need consistent GID/UID mappings or things like NFS |
| 57 |
will have lots of problems. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Package a few things in Gentoo that need a UID and/or GID and you will start |
| 60 |
to understand the problem from a operating system packager perspective. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
-- |
| 63 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives