Imagine we have a leaf package acct-user/foo, which has a reserved UID of 123. It gets last rited and its entry is removed from uid-gid.txt. After a while appears a new package acct-user/bar, which takes the 123 UID. Then a user, say Bob, updates their system, which haven't been updated for some time. What if they still have acct-user/foo, when acct-user/bar with the same UID is installed? Should we even care about such cases?

On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 11:22 Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:

El jue, 01-01-1970 a las 00:00 +0000, Ulrich Mueller escribió:
> > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > > Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide
> > > > on a
> > > > policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
> > >
> > > Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow could
> > > ping
> > > the QA team and ask if it should be closed, given the opinion
> > > there
> > > seems to be that there's no need to keep them, but I think it's
> > > wrong
> > > to do this pre-empting a policy decision, given it essentially
> > > forces
> > > the "don't keep them" path.
>
> > The bug has been open for several months without comment. If a
> > policy
> > were going to materialize, I think it would have happened by now.
>
> > Forcing the issue by sending this last rites notice seems
> > acceptable
> > to me.
>
> I'd say we remove the packages, because system user and group ids are
> a somewhat scarce resource.

I agree because of the same reasons