An idea on extending the "Package users" approach
fn42551 at fmi.uni-sofia.bg
Tue Jan 6 11:31:51 PST 2009
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Angel Tsankov
> <fn42551 at fmi.uni-sofia.bg> wrote:
>> In his hint "Package users" Matthias Benkmann recommends to name the
>> primary group of a package user after the user name. But why
>> duplicate information instead of extending it?!
> Having username=groupname is helpful in cases where the user/group
> needs to be changed to root for setuid/setgid scripts.
>> Couldn't we name the primary group after the
>> package (just as he suggests) but name the package user after the
>> package *and* the package version? This would make it very easy to
>> find which version or versions of a package are installed (provided
>> that when removing version V of package P *all* files belonging to
>> the respective user are removed). Does anyone see any flaws of this
> Lot of file clashes between users. Say you install foo-1.0 and then
> upgrade to foo-1.2. Generally, there will be lot of files that will be
> common to both foo-1.0 and foo-1.2. User foo-1.2 cannot update these
> files belonging to foo-1.0 without manual intervention.
Upgrading foo-1.0 to foo-1.2 should go without problem as both users foo-1.0
and foo-1.2 belong to the same group -- foo.
More information about the lfs-chat