Hi all, Quoting Philipp Kern (2019-06-23 15:14:34) > On 2019-06-21 07:51, Trek wrote: > >> If _apt deserves a special solution, I would suggest assigning the > >> _apt user a static uid instead of patching debootstrap. > > it seems to me the simplest approach, from a technical point of view, > > and it's the one I'm using since _apt user was introduced (making sure > > uids match) > Adding deity@l.d.o. APT maintainers, please see the context in the bug. > Do you think there should be logic in debootstrap to handle the case of > trying to have the same UID within a chroot and outside, or could you > apply for a static UID assignment? I would also prefer the latter, but I > honestly don't know how messy the migration would be...
with my mmdebstrap-maintainer hat on, I wanted to quickly chime in and express my support for the _apt user having a reproducible user id. The status quo is, that the apt user id depends on the order in which the maintainer scripts are executed. Because of this I had to disable some mmdebstrap tests where I compare the mmdebstrap chroot against the debootstrap chroot because the _apt uid would be different. One of the goals of mmdebstrap is to be a proof-of-concept of moving more and more of the mechanics that are currently hardcoded in debootstrap into apt and dpkg. So from my perspective, fixing the _apt uid is one piece of the puzzle that would make the life of debootstrap alternatives like mmdebstrap easier. Thanks! cheers, josch
signature.asc
Description: signature
