From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68BFF138350 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 20:16:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4432DE0905; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 20:16:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE139E08A5 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 20:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A239934E206 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 20:16:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP81 and /home To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <825bd707-faa2-f956-edbb-a11a8d82296b@gentoo.org> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <2453f2ae-ded7-2ac1-e345-f069894f505d@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 15:16:24 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: 6db5c7c8-47f6-4c13-8a5c-84607a216f79 X-Archives-Hash: 65610a64bd32607ff893ef95c9468946 On 1/18/20 2:03 PM, Alec Warner wrote: > > I tend to agree that in theory keeping the working directory and home > directory the same is not ideal. However  I'm not really aware of any > practical problems. Haven't we basically run in this configuration for > years? What kind of issues does it pose (outside of "well it sounds like > not the best idea?") There have been numerous bugs and mailing list discussions about the problems it causes, but it's kind of a moot point here. The best reason to avoid re-using /var/lib/amavis as the daemon's home directory is because it really is treated like a home directory by all of these packages, and we shouldn't dump a user's dotfiles into a daemon's working directory without a good reason. (We haven't been running this configuration for years, because we haven't had the GLEP81 eclasses that clobber your permissions for years.) > Agreeing with ulm here. I think the potential struggle for (3) is that > conceptually /home is not always system specific. If /home is shared, > you could end up with a bad time (e.g. I *don't* want /home/amavis > shared across all my hosts, how would I manage multiple versions? All of the upstream packages treat $HOME as user configuration. If you want to run two different daemons with two different configurations and if those configurations are sourced from $HOME, then you make two different users. There is no problem here. I'm willing to pick something like /var/lib/amavis-home, but that's clearly just second-guessing the administrator and putting a home directory somewhere it doesn't belong to avoid a QA warning. We have a similar situation with spamd in spamassassin itself, and I'd rather not maintain my own fake /home hierarchy as /var/lib/$user-home.