[Fedora-packaging] Re: Second user/group handling draft

Ville Skyttä ville.skytta at iki.fi
Sat May 12 09:18:09 UTC 2007

On Friday 11 May 2007, Axel Thimm wrote:

>   "If you think that your package really requires allocation of global
>   static uids/gids (because you need to hardwire these values into the
>   binaries) then contact <the maintainer of "setup"? the fpc? fesco?>
>   and ask for such an allocation. Only very few packages require a
>   global static uid/gid, so verify that you indeed need one before
>   contacting <>".

Adding users/groups to the "setup" package in the distro is an upgrade 
problem - /etc/passwd and friends will end up as *.rpmnew so something needs 
to ensure that the users/groups get created by other means - and at that 
point, it's not clear to me that it is a good idea to have this stuff in the 
distro "setup" package any more.

> o /srv/PACKAGE: We don't want to suggest to packagers to put anything
>   under /srv as this is up to the admin to specify the layout. While
>   one needs to admit that this may still be controversial within
>   Fedora it's safer to not mention it.

Ok, removed all explicit examples, now referring to just "data directory".

> o /usr/sbin -> %{_sbindir} just as an educational measure? (Perhaps
>   even rpmlint will cry if it's hardcoded?)

Perhaps, as the shadow-utils package uses %{_sbindir} as well, changed to that 
for now.  Another option would be to require shadow-utils (like Bill 
suggested) and use pathless useradd/groupadd.

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list