[gentoo-dev] enewgroup and enewuser suggestion

[gentoo-dev] enewgroup and enewuser suggestion

[Barry Shaw]

A while back I asked about reserved UIDs and GIDs and Mike mentioned 
that there was something in the works:

 > ive worked out the details with nick about portage support i just
 > havent passed it on to a few core people for comments so that i
 > can write the GLEP
 > -mike

The recent CVS upgrade brought this up again as it adds a new group and 
user 'cvs' using enewgroup and enewuser (the UID and GID are selected 
based on the next one available).

Given the fact that sites with large user bases will often have many 
UIDs/GIDs that aren't continuous, it would be a good idea if these 
functions were coded to check for the existence of a file that contained 
reserved (or allowed) ranges of UIDs/GIDs.  This would allow maximum 
generality in portage, whilst giving end users maximum flexibility.

I'm willing to code this if its deemed a useful idea.

Baz



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] enewgroup and enewuser suggestion

[rob]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 789 bytes --]

On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 08:59:27AM +1200, Barry Shaw wrote:
> Given the fact that sites with large user bases will often have many 
> UIDs/GIDs that aren't continuous, it would be a good idea if these 
> functions were coded to check for the existence of a file that contained 
> reserved (or allowed) ranges of UIDs/GIDs.  This would allow maximum 
> generality in portage, whilst giving end users maximum flexibility.
> 
> I'm willing to code this if its deemed a useful idea.

I already coded something similar-ish. It allowed you to specify a range
of UIDs that portage was allowed to use in make.conf. I sent the patch
to vapier and the idea was rejected. Instead portage was changed to only
add UIDs under 1000.

*shrug*

-- 
rob holland - [ director @ ereet ltd ]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] enewgroup and enewuser suggestion

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 24 May 2004 04:59 pm, Barry Shaw wrote:
> Given the fact that sites with large user bases will often have many
> UIDs/GIDs that aren't continuous, it would be a good idea if these
> functions were coded to check for the existence of a file that contained
> reserved (or allowed) ranges of UIDs/GIDs.  This would allow maximum
> generality in portage, whilst giving end users maximum flexibility.

that's already part of my GLEP :)
i guess i'll stop be so lazy and put it together/send it out
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] enewgroup and enewuser suggestion

[Barry Shaw]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
> that's already part of my GLEP :)
> i guess i'll stop be so lazy and put it together/send it out
> -mike
> 

Cool, I'll look forward to reading it when its done.  Thanks.

Baz


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list