From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SessB-0003rn-Ja for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:04:55 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CCB4E06B4; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:04:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 137AEE043A for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:04:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8580A1B4006 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:04:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: enewuser should force updates to shell and home Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:04:06 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.4.0; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <4FD8B910.3090606@gentoo.org> <20120613180931.GU20778@gentoo.org> <4FD8DCB6.4050207@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4FD8DCB6.4050207@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2574967.eMWA0jaVVa"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201206131504.07384.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 78657800-afc7-4512-b0bd-f8059640afa7 X-Archives-Hash: cf84b2b5ef18aaa1ff728b622ce62cbe --nextPart2574967.eMWA0jaVVa Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wednesday 13 June 2012 14:32:22 Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 13/06/12 02:09 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > On 13-06-2012 12:00:16 -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > >> Hey all - I'd like to propose that enewuser forces updates to a > >> user's home dir and shell whenever it is called, so that if this > >> changes with new versions of an ebuild it is dealt with > >> automatically rather than having to modify them in > >> pkg_postinst/pkg_setup directly. > >=20 > > What if some admin purposely changed home or shell for a system > > account? Would be quite annoying if every update would reset that, > > wouldn't it? >=20 > I considered this case, and that it might be more appropriate to > duplicate 'enewuser' into a new call 'eforceuser' (or similar) which > could be used instead of 'enewuser' in cases when the currently > provided user settings should be forced. >=20 > I decided against this as it seems also to make sense that users > created by portage should be controlled by portage. the users only get created by portage if they don't already exist. so i=20 wouldn't say that the user entries in /etc/passwd "belong" to portage. > I suppose probably the best means of handling this would be to somehow > detect whether or not the current user settings are default and only > apply the updates if they are; however a means of doing that (which > would be transparent to the ebuild) is somewhat beyond my knowledge > and abilities. we have egetshell and egethome already. thus it's fairly easy to detect th= e=20 transition case. if they installed the older version which set values that= =20 you now want to change: if has_version '