Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-18 Thread Simon McVittie
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 13:57:58 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Simon McVittie > >bubblewrap and other container-runners often use this when setting > >up containers - for example if you have a Flatpak app installed, try > >something like > > > >flatpak run

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-18 Thread Marc Haber
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 18:30:51 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: >On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 14:22:31 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: >> On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:01:13 +0100, Simon McVittie >> wrote: >> >(systemd cannot create a mount point that doesn't exist yet on a read-only >> >file system, which is why a

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-15 Thread Simon McVittie
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 09:54:44 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Do we have a list of all the things this is (or might be) used for ? As I said, I don't think a comprehensive list is feasible without resorting to something like codesearch, because it's of similar scope to a list of reasons to use the

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-15 Thread Ian Jackson
Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)"): > Somehow describing which containers and chroots should have a machine ID, > which ones should share the host's machine ID and which ones don't need > either is a gap in

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-14 Thread Simon McVittie
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 22:01:34 -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > That's just a matter of having sysvinit (and other non-systemd init > systems) have an init script which runs as soon as the root file > system is remounted read/write to initialize /etc/machine-id if it > doesn't exist or if it is a

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 06:30:51PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > >> >Maybe /etc/machine-id should be part of the "API" of a Debian system in > > >> >general (systemd or not)? > > > > So /etc/machine-id should be in Policy? > > Probably yes, if that proposal has consensus, although a

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Simon McVittie
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 14:22:31 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:01:13 +0100, Simon McVittie > wrote: > >(systemd cannot create a mount point that doesn't exist yet on a read-only > >file system, which is why a zero-byte file is preferred. > > but you can bind-mount over a file?

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Marc Haber
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 12:01:13 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: >(systemd cannot create a mount point that doesn't exist yet on a read-only >file system, which is why a zero-byte file is preferred. but you can bind-mount over a file? I wasn't aware of that. >If you use systemd as init, install dbus,

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Sam Hartman
> "Simon" == Simon McVittie writes: Simon> If you use systemd as init, install dbus, delete or empty Simon> /etc/machine-id, delete /var/lib/dbus/machine-id and reboot, It is my experience that deleting /etc/machine-id doesn't actually work (even if I delete the dbus machine id

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Simon McVittie
On Tue, 13 Aug 2019 at 11:50:27 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 22:44:19 +0100, Simon McVittie > wrote: > >Making /etc/machine-id a 0-byte file is considered to be the canonical > >way to clear it, rather than actually deleting it, because if systemd is > >running on a completely

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-13 Thread Marc Haber
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 22:44:19 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: >Making /etc/machine-id a 0-byte file is considered to be the canonical >way to clear it, rather than actually deleting it, because if systemd is >running on a completely read-only root filesystem, it has code to create >a machine ID on a

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-08 Thread Simon McVittie
On Thu, 08 Aug 2019 at 13:39:54 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > Generating a new machine-id doesn't seem as easy as generating a new > ssh key: Removing /etc/machine-id doesn't do it as > systemd-machine-id-setup seems to pull the machine-id from dbus. For historical reasons (dbus originated the

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-08 Thread Marc Haber
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:15:22 -0400, Marvin Renich wrote: >I think this is a good idea, but will require work and coordination to >accomplish. A wiki.debian.org page with your ideas and (perhaps on a >separate page) a place to list things that need updating after the >physical copying is complete

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-08 Thread Bernhard Schmidt
Am 08.08.19 um 13:39 schrieb Marc Haber: > On Wed, 07 Aug 2019 09:28:12 -0400, The Wanderer > wrote: >> On 2019-08-07 at 04:26, Russell Stuart wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 2019-08-07 at 09:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: >>> I am using Debian for two decades now, and I realized that necessity two

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-08 Thread Marc Haber
On Wed, 07 Aug 2019 09:28:12 -0400, The Wanderer wrote: >On 2019-08-07 at 04:26, Russell Stuart wrote: > >> On Wed, 2019-08-07 at 09:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: >> >>> I am using Debian for two decades now, and I realized that >>> necessity two days ago. >> >> Ditto - except for me it was a few

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread The Wanderer
On 2019-08-07 at 16:59, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Mi, 07 aug 19, 09:28:12, The Wanderer wrote: > >> I've begun to wonder whether it might be worth the overhead to set up >> some type of mechanism to let packages which define such >> machine-specific IDs A: declare the fact, in a central

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread Paul Wise
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 4:59 AM Andrei POPESCU wrote: > 1. Delete the contents of /etc (all of it) > 2. If a package doesn't find its "stuff" in /etc it regenerates it from > defaults. There is still way too much stuff that defaults to installing important files in /etc (default config settings,

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread Andrei POPESCU
On Mi, 07 aug 19, 09:28:12, The Wanderer wrote: > > I've begun to wonder whether it might be worth the overhead to set up > some type of mechanism to let packages which define such > machine-specific IDs A: declare the fact, in a central location which Do you mean /etc? :) > the sysadmin of a

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread Russ Allbery
The Wanderer writes: > This isn't the first time I've discovered that some aspect of a Debian > system would actually need to be cleared and re-generated when that > system is cloned, well after the point where it would have been easy for > me to address that need. (Fortunately, although I've

Re: Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread Marvin Renich
* The Wanderer [190807 09:28]: > Cloning isn't the only example of a case where some machine-specific > configuration detail may need to be updated, without that being obvious > in advance. > > I've begun to wonder whether it might be worth the overhead to set up > some type of mechanism to let

Generating new IDs for cloning (was Re: duplicate popularity-contest ID)

2019-08-07 Thread The Wanderer
On 2019-08-07 at 04:26, Russell Stuart wrote: > On Wed, 2019-08-07 at 09:34 +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > >> I am using Debian for two decades now, and I realized that >> necessity two days ago. > > Ditto - except for me it was a few seconds ago. In my case, it was when I read this thread last