Fedora User Management (revisited)

[Simo Sorce]

On Sat, 2007-03-10 at 14:11 +0100, Enrico Scholz wrote:
> Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> writes:
> 
> > vservers and chroots? Is this what this is all about? I'd say whoever
> > setups vservers and chroots *himself* and keeps different passwd/group
> > files across them should be able to deal with this.
> 
> I did this. And it was a pain to deal with it. 'fedora-usermgmt' solved
> this once and forever.


I don't want to seem willing to attack you personally, but if you didn't
think of synchronizing and rationalizing the uid/gid space, _before_
installing your shared environment, then that was just bad planning and
poor handling of the process on your side.
fedora-usermgmt may hide some of this, but still the bad planning is out
there you are basically just hacking up a nasty patch for it.

> >> 'fedora-usermgmt' deals both with users who must have predictable
> >> uids, who need predictable uids under some circumstances and who
> >> never need predictable uids (although: say never "never"). Its flaws
> >> (causes lot of discussion, is proprietary, nobody else uses it) are
> >> of non-technical nature and negligible and I do not see why it should
> >> not be used for all users.
> >
> > That's your POV. Exactly a year ago there was the same discussion
> > about it draining brain power and volunteer time.
> 
> Yes; there posted lot of people too who never took a look at
> fedora-usermgmt... :(

The mechanism you described says it all, no need to try it, it is very
clear what it does, and to many it is the wrong way to "fix" a
deployment planning problem in specific situations.

> > Since we can't count it, it needs to be weighted on a case by case
> > basis.
> 
> Why not use 'fedora-usermgmt'?

Cause its base mechanism is logically flawed ?

Simo.