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 825C0138350 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 23:38:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7B38AE092F; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 23:38:34 +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 22373E0917 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 23:38:34 +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 D5C4834E25A for ; Sat, 18 Jan 2020 23:38:32 +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: Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 18:38:27 -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: 02394808-f61a-42a2-b845-41cb443fa6c3 X-Archives-Hash: a48a513fd03168fdeb6f8b521cc09552 On 1/18/20 1:10 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> Should option (3) be viable, or do I go back to the drawing board? > > Chances are that /home is site specific, e.g. with a special backup > policy, or shared between many hosts via NFS. So IMHO /home is off > limits for the package manager. > We don't actually install anything there except the keepdir file, which is why this used to work with user.eclass. If someone later logs in as "amavis" and creates some configuration in $HOME, then that stuff is subject to your backup/sharing policy just like any other user data. I could always just use /home/amavis as $HOME and un-keepdir that location. We don't really care if the directory exists, until/unless someone logs in and starts adding configuration, so that's semantically correct. No permissions problems and no QA warnings either. But now users have to follow one more step (create /home/amavis) when setting up amavisd-new. Is the QA check really assuring a quality user experience here?