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
pgp1JnJ5oFNvI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
