Hello,
On Sun 05 Jan 2020 at 11:33PM +01, Philipp Kern wrote:
> I'd also propose the following hunk as I was myself confused where this
> list was maintained - base-passwd is mentioned in 0-99 but not
> explicitly in the on demand part. As policy seems to defer to that
> package as the list, it
On Di, 14.01.20 15:55, Michael Biebl (bi...@debian.org) wrote:
> Lennart, Zbyszek,
>
> what's your take on this?
>
> For some more background, see
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=905817
> and the recent discussion at
>
Lennart, Zbyszek,
what's your take on this?
For some more background, see
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=905817
and the recent discussion at
https://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2020/01/msg00013.html
Thanks,
Michael
Am 14.01.20 um 11:13 schrieb Philipp Kern:
> On
On 2020-01-05 23:33, Philipp Kern wrote:
And then the following (in spirit) to base-passwd to make the systemd
allocation explicit:
--- a/README
+++ b/README
@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ registry of allocations.
Reserved uids:
uid | name | description
Thanks again, Russ, Colin and Simon!
On 1/5/2020 7:25 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> 9.2.1 feels like the right spot to me. I think that's close to 9.2.2. We
> could also reiterate that guidance in 9.2.2.
>
>>> --- a/policy/ch-opersys.rst
>>> +++ b/policy/ch-opersys.rst
>>> @@ -228,13 +228,16 @@
Colin Watson writes:
> As Simon said, EF00-FFEF = 61184-65519 covers more than just netplan
> (https://salsa.debian.org/debian/base-passwd/blob/master/README), and
> several of the IDs allocated there in the vaguely recent past are hard
> to change (their rationales included "needs to be the
[I haven't been following the rest of this discussion. Thanks for the
CC - let me know if I'm egregiously missing anything.]
On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 10:25:37AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Philipp Kern writes:
> > It looks like the range must be contiguous, as it is compiled in[1].
> > What are
Philipp Kern writes:
> I fear that we might need a local policy hook for migrations. If we end
> up renaming users that are actively referenced elsewhere, there might be
> cleanup tasks that need to be performed in lockstep.
> At the same time I'd strongly suggest that we do not go the way of
>
On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 at 17:16:58 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 1/4/2020 5:08 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > It's also worth noting that the 61184-65519 uid range used for DynamicUser
> > by default collides with the rarely-used 6-64999 uid range for system
> > users that are "globally
Hey,
thanks, Sam, Simon and Russ! That was all very helpful! Much appreciated!
[Adding the systemd maintainers to the Cc for Simon's question below.]
On 1/4/2020 5:08 PM, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jan 2020 at 13:52:51 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
>> now that we are talking again about
Philipp Kern writes:
> OpenBSD rather successfully standardized on the underscore prefix to
> eliminate this conflict altogether. I would like that we recommend the
> same thing.
I agree.
> The main question that has been raised was how to manage the migration.
I agree with this too. I'm
On Sat, 04 Jan 2020 at 13:52:51 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> now that we are talking again about standardizing user creation using
> sysusers, I wonder if you could give me any guidance on how to attack
> the Debian system user namespacing problem.
It's a good reminder, but I think the naming
> "Philipp" == Philipp Kern writes:
Philipp> I tried to raise this issue in [2] a year ago, but I think I don't
know
Philipp> how to even start drafting a policy snippet about this. Would it be
Philipp> sufficient to just mandate "In order to avoid collisions with
accounts
(And then my broken keyboard driver caused this to be sent prematurely.
But alas, it's out now.)
On 1/4/2020 1:52 PM, Philipp Kern wrote:
> [Please cc me on replies as I am not currently subscribed to the list.]
>
> now that we are talking again about standardizing user creation using
>
[Please cc me on replies as I am not currently subscribed to the list.]
Hi,
now that we are talking again about standardizing user creation using
sysusers, I wonder if you could give me any guidance on how to attack
the Debian system user namespacing problem.
There are some well-known usernames
15 matches
Mail list logo
