On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Angel Tsankov <[email protected]> wrote: > Tushar Teredesai wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Angel Tsankov >> <[email protected]> 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. >> > So?
If you do a chmod root /usr/bin/crontab, then after the operation you do not know which package /usr/bin/crontab just by doing a ls -l /usr/bin/crontab. See the TIP at the end of Section 4.4 of the hint[1]. > >>> 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 >>> idea? >> >> 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. > foo-1.0 and foo-1.2 are separate users. foo-1.2 will not be able to overwrite files belonging to foo-1.0 unless you modify the permissions. See Section 4.6 of the hint[1]. [1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/more_control_and_pkg_man.txt -- Tushar Teredesai mailto:[email protected] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-chat FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
