Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/19610
On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 11:34:37 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 14.05.21 um 11:17 schrieb Guillem Jover: > > The version in experimental introduced a new system group called sgx > > which has an overly generic name with the potential to collide with > > user and group names, say their initials. Could it be rename to use > > the system name convention of prefixing it with «_»? > > I fear, that unfortunately this ship has sailed when it comes to naming > conventions. While I like the "_" prefix (e.g. much better then Debian-), > it's unfortunately not commonly used. > None of the groups defined in /usr/lib/sysusers.d/basic.conf use it. > "sgx" is supposed to be used in the same way as "audio", "video", "kmem", > "render" afaiu, none of those use the "_" prefix. Right, I checked the other instances and they seemed somewhat more scoped than sgx. Even thought it would indeed be nice to use a consistent namespacing there, but… > That said, you might try to raise this upstream. > I won't, I already had my share of confrontation on this issue, see > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/18944 > So I'm probably not the best person to bring this up again. Hmm, ok, I've submitted a report upstream, but have no high hopes of that being accepted. On Fri, 2021-05-14 at 11:40:12 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 14.05.21 um 11:34 schrieb Michael Biebl: > > "sgx" is supposed to be used in the same way as "audio", "video", > > "kmem", "render" afaiu, none of those use the "_" prefix. > > Personally, I don't see the nee for this "sgx" group, tbh, as it looks to be > very use case specific and will require explicit configuration anyway. > But if the point is, to provide a "well known" group that other, 3rd party > software can use, then renaming it kinda defeats the point and I'd rather > revert this upstream change then renaming the group. In the Debian context either a renamed group or a removed group would do for me. But this would still be a problem with upstream, and might mean projects start to rely on this name given that systemd upstream defines it, and might end up hardcoding it anyway in their code. :/ Thanks, Guillem
