On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:47 AM Panu Matilainen <pmati...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 7/15/19 6:57 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 11:52 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek > > <zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:13:21AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:04 AM Miroslav Suchý <msu...@redhat.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dne 10. 07. 19 v 9:19 James Antill napsal(a): > >>>>> 2. adduser/group/etc. => sysusers files > >>>> > >>>> For anyone willing to do this in advance on his/her package - this is > >>>> how you can do that: > >>>> > >>>> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/commit/cf4c8f076637755acc3cf4eb091d8ebb36020237 > >>>> > >>>> Here is relevant FPC ticket: > >>>> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/442 > >>>> > >>>> Just for the record - this does not make things to run faster. You still > >>>> have to have %pre scriptlets. It is likely even > >>>> slower as you are running %posttranstrigger as well. The benefit is here > >>>> only that we move toward declarative specification. > >>>> > >>> > >>> That’s also going to fail, because the %pre script executes before the > >>> file exists. That’s why these guidelines are broken, and why I > >>> suggested we deal with sysusers differently. > >> > >> Oops, you're right. As /usr/lib/rpm/macros.d/macros.systemd says, > >> %sysusers_create is "deprecated. Use %sysusers_create_package instead". > >> > > > > It’d be better to subpackage it and have a file trigger that runs for > > each package that contains those files and creates the sysusers. That > > ensures ordering, existence, and makes it reliable. Subpackages will > > also allow other packages to be able to depend on those if needed > > without the software (e.g. apache user being used by both apache httpd > > and nginx). > > I was about to say sub-packages seem a bit heavy solution to user > creation but instead I'm going to say that thinking about it a bit, it > is a pretty powerful solution (user/group -dependencies being a nice > example) and one that actually works by leveraging widely deployed rpm > mechanisms. > > And since that's used by OpenSUSE then basically we just need to adopt a > working solution, and we'd be increasing unity in the packaging world as > an extra bonus. > > So a big +1 for sysusers in sub-packages + file trigger to handle > running systemd-sysusers. It solves more problems than the current > sysusers-proposal and in a far more elegant way at that. >
The ideal would be that RPM would have native functionality for managing these things, but this is the next best thing, in my view. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
