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 89442138350 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 01:51:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A167AE09AD; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 01:51:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.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 5A3C1E09A6 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 01:51:55 +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 F297834E2AB for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2020 01:51:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP81 and /home To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <825bd707-faa2-f956-edbb-a11a8d82296b@gentoo.org> <2313c928-6c17-394c-d437-b5ad1f76ecea@gentoo.org> <4c60e5c5-92ce-09f0-09c5-a7338bb9cfb3@gentoo.org> <21efee36-dcc8-bb14-9fb9-0d6b2abf8c8d@gentoo.org> <5e98c62e-3501-9322-7129-a9d6105a6126@gentoo.org> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <6d0bbd7c-27e2-4973-2f11-074c1fa48b6b@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2020 20:51:51 -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: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: bec8020b-090a-4855-952b-2f243430f5ec X-Archives-Hash: 376f6daf055a95a778d83f837ea5c44d On 1/19/20 8:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > It would be far simpler for the sysadmin to simply ensure that no > unsynced user owns a file or appears in an ACL. That would be pretty > trivial to achieve. Whatever is hosting /home could be designed to > block such changes, or you could just scan for these ownership issues > periodically and treat those responsible for them appropriately. Fantasy scenarios again. I'm not going to debunk a system that you just thought up and that has never existed. Why don't you find one person who actually does this, and see if it bothers him if we create a home directory under /home where it belongs? > On the topic of treating those responsible appropriately, somehow I > could see this scenario turning into a quiz question. > > I mean, would it kill you to just talk to QA first? I've already got responses from two QA members. This thread is pretty hard to miss. I'm working on a patch for the install-qa-check.d check and I'm sure I'll get more when I post it.