Re: fedora-usermgmt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Tue, 20 Dec 2011 12:24:21 +0100, SC (Simone) wrote:

> Hello,
> can you please explain that a bit further? I don't think I understand,
> I see this reference at

You've quoted the relevant part. Here:

> Another solution might be semi-static UIDs, which are relative to a
> system-wide value and unique for the entire Fedora Project. The
> current (experimental) implementation uses the file
> /etc/fedora/usermgmt/baseuid to configure the value to which the
> relative UID would be added. As an example, when
> /etc/fedora/usermgmt/baseuid contains "30000", the user 'joe', with
> the semi-static UID 23, will get the final UID 30023 (30000+23)."

So, if you drop using fedora-usermgmt, you cannot keep the relative (!)
uid 33 that has been registered for it. 33 is "amandabackup":

  $ rpm -qd setup
  /usr/share/doc/setup-2.8.36/uidgid           <-- (!)

Package "setup"'s %changelog mentions a lot of activity related to reserving
system uids/gids.

> The file /etc/fedora/usermgmt/baseuid contains 300, so I'm guessing
> the correct setup for Bacula would be to set 333 as the uid/gid. Is
> that correct?

You would first need to have uid 333 registered/reserveed as a fixed uid.

> The previous version used fedora-usermgmt (so uid 333) but did not
> remove the user and directory;

Well, then it isn't following the guidelines, which mention the userdel
scriptlets. ;)

> that is pointless anyway because you
> don't remove the directory only if you have it dynamic.

However, if the directory contains files created at run-time, the package
should not "rm -rf" those files when uninstalling, so it could remove the
empty dir.
packaging mailing list

[Home]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Fedora Bible]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

Powered by Linux