[gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Doug Goldstein]

How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27?

Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: GLEP 27

[Duncan]

Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> posted 47FE7A18.1020207@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on  Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:36 -0400:

> How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP
> 27?
> 
> Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html

For those who don't know their GLEPs by number, this is
Portage management of UIDs/GIDs.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 903 bytes --]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 04:35:36PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27?
> Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
I'm strongly in favour of moving forward with it.

Way back in the past of Gentoo, a stab was made at keeping a single
static file, but nobody bothered with it, since it wasn't in the
gentoo-x86 tree.

For GLEP27, I believe there was a SoC some years ago implementing it, I
don't know what became of that code.

My specific interest in it is for having a sane UID/GIDs that are
identical between a set of machines, regardless of the order packages
are emerged in.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
E-Mail     : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 329 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Fabian Groffen]

On 10-04-2008 16:35:36 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP 27?
>
> Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html

See also:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53269


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Doug Goldstein]

Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> 
> My specific interest in it is for having a sane UID/GIDs that are
> identical between a set of machines, regardless of the order packages
> are emerged in.
> 

Same here. Which is why I'm hoping to revitalize GLEP 27.

-- 
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[RB]

>  My specific interest in it is for having a sane UID/GIDs that are
>  identical between a set of machines, regardless of the order packages
>  are emerged in.

I was initially surprised to see Gentoo didn't have written standards
for UID/GID management, but don't see many other distros having one
either.  Would it be untoward to extend this GLEP to define both
default ranges and an internal body to hand them out?  I, for one, am
aesthetically uncomfortable with processes like mysql and rpm using
IDs < 100, but don't have a clean technical argument as to why they
shouldn't.

It would also probably be fruitful to have enewgroup/enewuser check
UID_MIN/GID_MIN instead of hard-coding the 101-999 search it does now.
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Mike Kelly]

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:36 -0400
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:

> How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP
> 27?
> 
> Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html

This was my SoC project a few years back. I have the code mostly done,
minus some more sanity checks, unit tests, testing by folks, and patch
to jam it into portage (should be trivial for someone who knows
portage's code, which I don't).

The project is called Creandus, and you can find it at:
http://creandus.pioto.org/

-- 
Mike Kelly
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 27

[Doug Goldstein]

Mike Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:35:36 -0400
> Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>   
>> How does everyone feel about the proposed layout and syntaxes of GLEP
>> 27?
>>
>> Do we want to revisit this GLEP with an updated GLEP or status quo?
>>
>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0027.html
>>     
>
> This was my SoC project a few years back. I have the code mostly done,
> minus some more sanity checks, unit tests, testing by folks, and patch
> to jam it into portage (should be trivial for someone who knows
> portage's code, which I don't).
>
> The project is called Creandus, and you can find it at:
> http://creandus.pioto.org/
>
>   
Yep. Already grabbed your code. Thanks for the work Mike.

I was planning on starting it initially by adding all the data to the 
tree and then letting your code be added as part for an EAPI bump to PMS.
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list