On Jan 30, 2008 3:24 AM, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/1/30, Lucas C. Villa Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Jan 30, 2008 1:22 AM, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > We'll have to settle on a numbering for these required user/group ids > > > > (which are not that much). Given that Resources/Requirements provide > > > > include that id that would not be a problem. > > > > > > > We don't need the numbers. Just keep a list in Requirements over what > > > files were owned by which user and run 'chown' after installation. > > > > That depends on what we want. The numbers helps us to keep recipes > > simple, and it's already implemented.. :) > > > In what way is numbers more simple? If we use number we have to know > that it correspond to the correct user in the target system. With > names we can just grep for the appropriate number in > /System/Settings/passwd
Using numbers only, required_users[] and required_groups[] are enough to make the program work. On the other hand, the second implementation will require required_users[] / required_groups[] _plus_ a new list (a la unmanaged_files[]) of files that need to be chown'd. That just makes the recipe bigger. -- Lucas powered by /dev/dsp _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
