1 |
On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 15:02 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 09:18:23 +0200 David Seifert wrote: |
3 |
> > On Fri, 2019-06-21 at 08:59 +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:32:56 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: |
5 |
> > > > On Thu, 2019-06-20 at 09:53 -0400, Brian Evans wrote: |
6 |
> > > > > On 6/9/2019 7:39 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
7 |
> > > > > > +Tracking of user/group usage is done through |
8 |
> > > > > > dependencies. As |
9 |
> > > > > > long |
10 |
> > > > > > +as any installed package depends on a specific user/group |
11 |
> > > > > > package, |
12 |
> > > > > > +the respective user/group is assumed to be used. If no |
13 |
> > > > > > package |
14 |
> > > > > > +requiring the specific user/group is left, the package |
15 |
> > > > > > manager |
16 |
> > > > > > +automatically prunes the package clearly indicating it is |
17 |
> > > > > > no |
18 |
> > > > > > longer |
19 |
> > > > > > +used. |
20 |
> > > > > |
21 |
> > > > > You cannot know when a name is "no longer used". An |
22 |
> > > > > administrator could |
23 |
> > > > > have adopted a username for other purposes. |
24 |
> > > > |
25 |
> > > > That's why we don't remove the actual user/group. However, |
26 |
> > > > this is |
27 |
> > > > a valuable information to the administrator that no package is |
28 |
> > > > using |
29 |
> > > > the user/group in question. |
30 |
> > > |
31 |
> > > So how do you propose to clean them up? Or let user systems trash |
32 |
> > > with unused uids/gids? The GLEP 81 only mensions some possible |
33 |
> > > tooling for cleanup. Is there an implementation available? I |
34 |
> > > don't |
35 |
> > > see it within proposed patch sets. |
36 |
> > > |
37 |
> > > This GLEP should not be accepted unless all necessary tools are |
38 |
> > > available including a cleanup tool. |
39 |
> > > |
40 |
> > > Best regards, |
41 |
> > > Andrew Savchenko |
42 |
> > |
43 |
> > Strongly disagree: |
44 |
> > |
45 |
> > 1) User systems are already getting trashed. And apparently it's |
46 |
> > not a |
47 |
> > critical thing that prevents users from using Gentoo in practice. |
48 |
> > 2) A cleanup tool at best will only tell you which files you need |
49 |
> > to |
50 |
> > check, randomly deleting files with orphaned uids/gids is not a |
51 |
> > good |
52 |
> > idea. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> What will happen when some acct-*/* package will be unmerged? Will |
55 |
> uid/gid record and/or its files be deteleted? |
56 |
> |
57 |
> > 3) This proposal strictly increases the quality of Gentoo. Don't |
58 |
> > let |
59 |
> > perfect be the enemy of the good. The fact that the problem isn't |
60 |
> > solved to 100% doesn't mean that a solution that gets us there 85% |
61 |
> > should be rejected. |
62 |
> > |
63 |
> > Strongly vote +1 to merge this now. |
64 |
> > |
65 |
> > |
66 |
> |
67 |
> Best regards, |
68 |
> Andrew Savchenko |
69 |
|
70 |
They will remain orphaned on the file system. So again, this is in no |
71 |
way worse than the status quo, and given that users/groups will be |
72 |
managed through a package manager, tracking orphaned uids/gids is a lot |
73 |
better with this proposal. |