On Mon, 07.07.14 11:08, Leonid Isaev (lis...@umail.iu.edu) wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the explanation... > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 12:26:03PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > I wasn#t aware of grpck, and quite frankly don't think it makes much > > sense, what the tool is doing. > > Why? Checking syntax can never hurt...
Well, I am not opposed to that. I am just saying that otherwise the current logic so nicely considers an account with a missing counterpart in /etc/shadow disabled with no way to log in, which is exactly what we want here. However, grpck tool breaks that... > > > Does it mean that on each update, a package manager should touch > > > /etc/.updated? > > > > Hmm? No. A package manager should touch /usr after having done its work. > > Just to see if I understand: this would mean that ConditionNeedsUpdate = > .true. > for /etc, no? So, we _do_ want systemd-sysusers.service, ldconfig.service, et > al. to run on next boot after an update? Well, the idea is that they are NOPs if they already ran from postinst... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel