On 8/23/19 3:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> That used to be acceptable, since the "enewuser" command with the home >> directory was part of the package that used that directory. But now that >> the user data are in another package, we can't depend on them reliably. >> > > ...and why is that, exactly? Are you assuming that someone will take > over the dedicated user for another purpose and change its home > directory? >
The fact that the home directory can change is a feature that you yourself went out of the way to support. We can't rely on the value of ACCT_USER_HOME in a dependency, and nothing is gained by doing so -- so why do it? That's one reason. It also greatly simplifies the guidelines. Have you ever refactored something and had it just feel right? This just feels right. I think most developers don't care about these details and would just like to get the job done. If we can give them a list of a few simple guidelines to follow, then everyone's happy. If we put the keepdir/fowners/fperms in the logically-correct place, it allows us to also say: don't use a home directory owned by another package (use the default). That in turn prevents acct-user packages from clobbering the permissions and ownership on stuff that belongs to somebody else. All pros, no cons.
