Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 0/6] nix and guix GID/UID assignments

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2441 bytes --]

On Mon, 2019-11-25 at 20:28 +0000, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 17:24:08 +0100
> David Seifert <soap@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2019-11-24 at 20:35 +0000, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:
> > > On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 17:19:36 +0100
> > > Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, 24 Nov 2019, Sergei Trofimovich wrote:    
> > > > > I interpreted 'reserved' as 'free to use' on
> > > > >     
> > > > > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/UID_GID_Assignment
> > > > > Can you tweak it to someting other than 'reserved' so it would be
> > > > > clear?    
> > > > 
> > > > That's what the "Notes" column was intended for.
> > > >   
> > > > > I'll use 60001 .. 60999 / 61001 .. 61999. Is it free though?
> > > > > '60001..65533' claims to also be 'reserved' as well.    
> > > > 
> > > > Debian is also using the range above 60000 for allocations that
> > > > won't
> > > > fit into the low range. Theoretically, there is some overlap with
> > > > systemd dynamic users (61184..65519), but IIUC assigning other UIDs
> > > > in
> > > > that range isn't a problem, as long as there are enough free IDs
> > > > left.
> > > > 
> > > > Another question, the above are about 2000 users and 2000 groups.
> > > > Does that imply that we will eventually end up with 4000 packages
> > > > in acct-{user,group}?  
> > > 
> > > Should be 2000 users, 2 groups. Worst case it's 2002 packages, yes.
> > >   
> > 
> > For a package manager that likely only 3 Gentoo users in the world use?
> 
> I'll avoid debating you scientific method of deriving that number.
> What is your threshold? 10 users? 1000 users? 100000 users?

Could you provide some numbers on performance impact of having that many
users?  In particular on systems using plain text passwd database.

> 
> > I don't consider that particularly helpful, and am very much inclined
> > to oppose that.
> 
> I'm fine with current use of user.eclass if QA grants nix and guix an
> exception to use user.eclass indefinitely instead of GLEP-81 layout.

I would rather be inclined to give nix and guix a special privilege of
being moved to an overlay.  It seems so far that they are unjustly
trying to assume growing number of privileges they have no claim for,
and trying to run their own non-Gentoo shop inside Gentoo for no good
reason.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]