OoO En ce doux début de matinée du samedi 15 novembre 2008, vers 08:49,
je disais:
> ,----[ http://wiki.debian.org/AccountHandlingInMaintainerScripts ]
> | A collision free way to name system accounts should really be mentioned
> | in Debian policy to stop this uncontrolled growth of different methods.
> `----
> Is it any progress on this matter? While more and more daemon become
> unprivileged or "privilege separation"-able, we get more and more system
> users.
> On some systems like OpenBSD, all those users are starting with
> underscore to avoid collision with real users. On Debian, I have never
> seen this, even for packages that comes from OpenBSD (like openntpd
> which uses "ntpd"). Is there some drawbacks with underscore?
I wanted to file a wishlist bug against policy about this matter but
there is already one that exists:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=248809
The bug is pretty old and the discussion stopped a few years ago. The
problem of too long usernames when using "Debian-" prefix was already
mentioned.
The possibility to use "_${package}" is mentioned once as an
example.
IMO, there are three advantages to using underscore:
- it defines a namespace (like using "Debian-" prefix)
- the name is kept short
- it is easy to spot those system names in ps or other tools
Is there some way to easily retrieve all postinst scripts to check how
adduser is called?
--
printk("autofs: Out of inode numbers -- what the heck did you do??\n");
2.0.38 /usr/src/linux/fs/autofs/root.c
Attachment:
pgpIAe8S_q4ds.pgp
Description: PGP signature