On 1/4/21 1:20 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Most importantly, it doesn't resolve the core issue of 'we need to
update home before merging reverse dependencies'.
Quoth the devmanual, "if your package requires a user, you can no longer
be sure of that user's home directory or its ownership and perm
On 2021-01-04 19:27, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
People like me could just ignore changed users if changes won't go live
until you run said users-update command or make use of INSTALL_MASK.
Changes wouldn't go live until you ran etc-update, and *then* users-update.
This would address my concerns
On 1/4/21 1:23 PM, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
People like me could just ignore changed users if changes won't go live
until you run said users-update command or make use of INSTALL_MASK.
Changes wouldn't go live until you ran etc-update, and *then* users-update.
Hi,
On 2021-01-04 19:07, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
We could implement this with something like an /etc/users.d directory
that would be populated with entries by either the admin or package
manager with CONFIG_PROTECT enabled. Then the system database would be
updated by running something like "u
On Mon, 2021-01-04 at 13:07 -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 1/4/21 11:45 AM, James Cloos wrote:
> > > > > > > "RHJ" == Robin H Johnson writes:
> >
> > RHJ> The best I can come up with at the moment, is that any packaging should
> > RHJ> detect if there are user modifications, and provide cont
On 1/4/21 11:45 AM, James Cloos wrote:
"RHJ" == Robin H Johnson writes:
RHJ> The best I can come up with at the moment, is that any packaging should
RHJ> detect if there are user modifications, and provide control to users
RHJ> based on that fact.
Exactly. Akin to etc-update.
We could imp
> "RHJ" == Robin H Johnson writes:
RHJ> The best I can come up with at the moment, is that any packaging should
RHJ> detect if there are user modifications, and provide control to users
RHJ> based on that fact.
Exactly. Akin to etc-update.
-JimC
--
James Cloos OpenPGP: 0x997A9F17
