On 14/02/20 19:48, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>> And now you're changing the subject.  You've just claimed that *your*
>> user's group ownership will be overwritten and when challenged you
>> present the case of *system* user's group ownership being overwritten.
> Actually, he showed the rewrite of **system** user (that was modified 
> locally).
>
> And, as it already mentioned above, this behaviour violates Gentoo Philosophy 
> of not pretending to be smarter than user and don't dictate them a way to go.
>
> So, if the problem is only in the existance of the bug, I can create it 
> tomorrow morning.
> But it would be great to know that it wont be closed in a minute after with 
> "WONTFIX, works as expected".
>
> Also, as already stated, changing the stuff that was modified by user is 
> **prohibited**.
>
> P.S. I don't care about your  relations with whissi, but let's back to the 
> topic:
>
> [big red letters]
> We should **NEVER** ever rewrite any system configuration made by local system 
> administrator (call it "user" or whatever). Dixi.
> [/big red letters]
>
> Modification of system users and groups are also covered by that user.
>
> So, we, actually don't need any changes to disable acct-* things at all and 
> make users to manage all the things by themselves.
> We need a change that will prevent any changes over **already existing** user.
>
> I think we should make it in a manner like:
> 1) when we install acct-pkg for a first time - CONFIG_PROTECT changes, and let 
> user to review.
> 2) when we **reinstall** same package - do **nothing**. Although, I'm not sure 
> here:
> on the one hand, why should we bother users by merging changes they already 
> did before,
> on the other hand, it can be useful way to reset to defaults in case if "all 
> this stuff is screwed up".
> 3) when we upgrade acct-package (assuming there was changes) - only allow 
> "positive" changes (group additions), but not negative (dropiing groups), and 
> anyway CONFIG_PROTECT all the changes.
>
>
> Well, there is also "kludgy way": does not globally reimplement anything, but:
> 1)  force CFGPROTECT
> 2) perform a "light" modification to only perform "positive" modifications 
> (see above) on users/groups, but no "negatives".
> It will anyway fix the both issues Whissi and OP had. 
>
There is a filthy hack which works around all this nonsense .. throw all
acct-* packages in a Package.Provided entry, and mask installation of any
other versions ..

*runs and hides*