On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 06:47:41PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 3/4/07, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath redhat com> wrote: > >Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >> Once upon a time Sunday 04 March 2007, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> > >>> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi > >>>> > >>>> I see fedora-usermgmt has been made available for EPEL. That is > >>>> probably going to cause some confusion. Maybe rename it into > >>>> system-usermgmt or something more distribution neutral. The other > >>>> packages except for fedora-ds-base are all indeed specific to Fedora. > >>>> > >>>> Rahul > >>>> > >>> Why don't we just remove it? > >>> > >> Mike, i know you hate it :) but alot of packages use it. > >> > > > >More packages don't use it and no packages in RHEL use it. I'll stop > >now, I don't want to be "that guy" :-D > > > > Can I be that guy. Personally I think F-U-M has caused me more > problems moving apps over into an enterprise environment. Trying to > get packages installed before LDAP is up etc and having to deal with > oh look clamav is now the same as Johnny the Hacker. FWIW I hate it, too, anyone here around with other feelings for that? Maybe we're all "that guy" ;) Anyway please kill and *ban* it, we should endorse using that mechanism. If an application really needs a fixed uid/gid let's provide it one and let's fix the uid/gid 100-499 space being eaten from low to high (high to low would be 1000x better) which is dangling for years. If non-fixed system account had been assigned 499 lowwards then we'd have now space to extend to say uid/gid 200 ... I think I somewhere have an old bugzilla against it, lemme see ... here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190523 A perfect example of reporter and assignee not being able to communicate. Feel free to add your comments there to make something happen. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpwWDpEUgSGB.pgp
Description: PGP signature