| 1 |
On 5/29/19 4:01 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> I wonder why that would be needed. It won't catch collisions with users |
| 4 |
> created by the system administrator. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
The reference implementation did its best not to annoy you here. |
| 7 |
Ultimately, no, it can't prevent the system administrator from |
| 8 |
clobbering a UID that some package needs. But, most packages won't |
| 9 |
insist on a fixed UID. If they do, and if the system administrator |
| 10 |
created a "compatible" user (one that doesn't conflict with any of your |
| 11 |
useradd arguments), then the existing user account would be reused. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
> Collisions between packages could |
| 15 |
> certainly be prevented without littering the file system, e.g., by |
| 16 |
> scanning ebuilds in that category (by repoman, or CI)? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Memory hazy, but I think I ventured down this road for a few reasons: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
* Using file collisions is a PMS behavior that will work everywhere. |
| 22 |
* Parsing bash variables in repoman/CI sucks and doesn't work. |
| 23 |
* We want to be warned about the collision during development, before |
| 24 |
we push to ::gentoo. |
| 25 |
* We should prevent collisions in overlays, too. |
| 26 |
* The UID that actually gets created may not be the one in your |
| 27 |
ebuild, if it wasn't available. The real UID is only known at |
| 28 |
install-time. (This one is important IIRC.) |
Archives