Users and groups kept after a port deinstallation
in [Ports]
|
From: jhell on 23 May 2010 12:24 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 23 May 2010 02:02, Matthew Seaman wrote: In Message-Id: <4BF8C4F8.9090103(a)infracaninophile.co.uk> > On 23/05/2010 04:47:49, jhell wrote: >> But if a port can install a user there is no reason that it can not >> uninstall a user via pw(8) that is available from bsd.commands.mk after >> checking a recorded md5(1) sum that it could create upon installation >> for the output of pw usershow/groupshow UID/GID. > > The trick would be to teach the ports how to tell if a port was being > deleted for good, when trashing the user would be appropriate, or if the > port was being deleted as part of the process of upgrading it, when > you'ld want to keep the user. > That shouldn't actually be to hard. If a utility like the three main upgrade tools that are being used the most right now would export a variable for say "UPGRADING=yes" then the uninstall script could check against that to decide whether or not the port is being removed or upgraded and make the proper decision while alerting the admin to whats going on. Regards, - -- jhell -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJL+VbIAAoJEJBXh4mJ2FR+6d0H/RzxsitENOuEiG1j9l6cucod taGMfoitDYEFe7umLAyx/qfcLVkxRoVKNcStXGdQYFmhgbs0U3LgRfeCroKHcgaG GQkojvJvHMq0bGPXkGyM5Uqk2duN59dJbWyRqlfAxAt1b9SDl6LkHzfi4Bb0CoZ6 6/+izQ5Nl0nDDGGwzou2uCqhJ20YTm9N+XD5pdvDPPdC208wCc+1IPRNlZbx1stM B4viIveIBNJei1ooNqH3qwzO/fdOpJhd09eZNncOGLKPguHNNmqa/UH0ftXIBykU 3edE+gP+bvnf0kYeFBofYJDrG7H6grAyRUoObcD42sROLoD9Wk/RTO/MXZ8ekjA= =6JuP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Chuck Swiger on 23 May 2010 13:15 Hi-- On May 22, 2010, at 10:59 PM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > OpenBSD has a convention that all system user accounts start with a '_' > character. There are a few accounts in UIDs that have adopted that, but > no great stampede to adopt the idea despite most people agreeing with it. That convention is being adopted by MacOS 10.6, also. It does make it easier for one to separate out processes invoked by a human from automated tasks in ps or top... Regards, -- -Chuck _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Doug Barton on 23 May 2010 13:59 On 05/23/10 09:24, jhell wrote: > > That shouldn't actually be to hard. If a utility like the three main > upgrade tools that are being used the most right now would export a > variable for say "UPGRADING=yes" then the uninstall script could check > against that to decide whether or not the port is being removed or > upgraded and make the proper decision while alerting the admin to whats > going on. The previous author of portupgrade and I agreed on the following variables to be set in our tools: UPGRADE_TOOL=portmaster UPGRADE_PORT=<name of port with version> UPGRADE_PORT_VER=`echo $UPGRADE_PORT | sed 's#.*-\(.*\)#\1#'` The last 2 are not set if this is a new install. hth, Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Alexander Churanov on 24 May 2010 12:22 2010/5/23 jhell <jhell(a)dataix.net>: > That shouldn't actually be to hard. If a utility like the three main upgrade > tools that are being used the most right now would export a variable for say > "UPGRADING=yes" then the uninstall script could check against that to decide > whether or not the port is being removed or upgraded and make the proper > decision while alerting the admin to whats going on. Folks, May be is' better to add another make target, called "update", which would invoke "deinstall", followed by "reinstall"? This would encapsulate the mechanism inside port.mk. Alexander Churanov _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org"
From: Garrett Cooper on 24 May 2010 12:27
On May 24, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Alexander Churanov wrote: > 2010/5/23 jhell <jhell(a)dataix.net>: >> That shouldn't actually be to hard. If a utility like the three main upgrade >> tools that are being used the most right now would export a variable for say >> "UPGRADING=yes" then the uninstall script could check against that to decide >> whether or not the port is being removed or upgraded and make the proper >> decision while alerting the admin to whats going on. > > Folks, > > May be is' better to add another make target, called "update", which > would invoke "deinstall", followed by "reinstall"? This would > encapsulate the mechanism inside port.mk. I'm going to have toe disagree with you on this. Using pkg_install with the appropriate install/deinstall scripts would better solve the installation and deletion scenarios properly (especially because adding code like this to port.mk would be haphazard in cases where you need to specify a specific DESTDIR, PREFIX, etc). Thanks, -Garrett_______________________________________________ freebsd-ports(a)freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe(a)freebsd.org" |