Dnia 2014-07-30, o godz. 15:44:28 Andrew Savchenko napisał(a): > On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 12:28:32 +0200 Alexander Berntsen wrote: > > On 30/07/14 09:26, Michał Górny wrote: > > > 3. the use of group 'games' to control access to games can be > > > deprecated and needs not to be enforced, > > I would like the council to consider removing this group altogether, > > and fixing all ebuilds to not use it. > > Please carefully consider this matter. Having a dedicated group is > quite convenient to limit users from using games on workstations > and is also handy as a parental control feature. Please tell me, how many uses of games on workstations were actually prevented thanks to it? How often do you happen to have a station that has multiple users, games installed and you want to limit *all* portage-installed games to subset of those users? This a misguided attempt of fixing a social issue via technical means, and it backfires a lot. In some cases it's an overkill, in some cases it's incomplete. Following this logic, we ought to also limit access to all ECMAScript-capable web browsers and scripting languages, including the shell... oh wait, we just bricked the machine. The only correct reason to limit access to games is when those involve proprietary games for which only one of the users has license. But then, it's a very big sledgehammer and a very small nut -- think of the casualties. > > Maybe we could finally get rid > > of this[0] 8 year old bug in the process. > > > > [0] > > If application doesn't validate its input, this is an application's > bug. If users are allowed to edit files they were not supposed to edit, then it's a distribution bug. Failure to validate input is orthogonal to this, and should be fixed independently of it. -- Best regards, Michał Górny