Sam James writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
> Florian Schmaus writes:
>
>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>> On 18/07/2023 11.56, Sam James wrote:
>>> Mike Gilbert writes:
>>>
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
>> Haven't we been keeping these because we still
Florian Schmaus writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
> On 18/07/2023 11.56, Sam James wrote:
>> Mike Gilbert writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
> Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
> policy about what to do with dead
On 18/07/2023 11.56, Sam James wrote:
Mike Gilbert writes:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow
Mike Gilbert writes:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
>> > Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
>> > policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
>>
>> Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow could ping
>> the QA team
On 18-07-2023 11:42:39 +0300, Зураб Квачадзе wrote:
> How do we handle this case, then.
> Imagine we have a leaf package acct-user/foo, which has a reserved UID of 123.
> It gets last rited and its entry is removed from uid-gid.txt. After a while
> appears a new package acct-user/bar, which takes
Well, this configuration is reasonable, I am for the change
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 11:55 Florian Schmaus wrote:
> On 18/07/2023 10.42, Зураб Квачадзе wrote:
> > How do we handle this case, then.
> > Imagine we have a leaf package acct-user/foo, which has a reserved UID
> > of 123. It gets last
On 18/07/2023 10.42, Зураб Квачадзе wrote:
How do we handle this case, then.
Imagine we have a leaf package acct-user/foo, which has a reserved UID
of 123. It gets last rited and its entry is removed from uid-gid.txt.
Nobody is proposing that the uid-gid.txt entry is removed. Ideally, it
How do we handle this case, then.
Imagine we have a leaf package acct-user/foo, which has a reserved UID of
123. It gets last rited and its entry is removed from uid-gid.txt. After a
while appears a new package acct-user/bar, which takes the 123 UID. Then a
user, say Bob, updates their system,
El jue, 01-01-1970 a las 00:00 +, Ulrich Mueller escribió:
> > > > > > On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
> > > > Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide
> > > > on a
> > > > policy about what to do with dead
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
>> > Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
>> > policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
>>
>> Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James wrote:
> > Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
> > policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
>
> Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow could ping
> the QA team and ask if it should be closed,
Matt Turner writes:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 3:43 PM Florian Schmaus wrote:
>>
>> # Florian Schmaus (2023-07-17)
>> # Obsolete acct-* packages which became leaf packages.
>> # Removal on 2023-08-17.
>> acct-user/artifactory
>> acct-group/artifactory
>> acct-user/cinder
>> acct-group/cinder
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 3:43 PM Florian Schmaus wrote:
>
> # Florian Schmaus (2023-07-17)
> # Obsolete acct-* packages which became leaf packages.
> # Removal on 2023-08-17.
> acct-user/artifactory
> acct-group/artifactory
> acct-user/cinder
> acct-group/cinder
> acct-user/glance
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
