On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 01:01:48PM -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 7/8/13 12:27 PM, Martin Jansa wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 12:15:40PM -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 7/5/13 3:39 AM, Martin Jansa wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 02:07:28PM +0800, qi.c...@windriver.com wrote: > >>>> From: Chen Qi <qi.c...@windriver.com> > >>>> > >>>> We may want to add a user or group which does not logically belong to > >>>> any specific package. For example, we may want to add a user with the > >>>> name 'tester' to our image. Besides, we may want to delete or modify > >>>> user/group in our image. > >>>> > >>>> This patch adds a variable, USER_GROUP_SETTINGS, which is dedicated > >>>> to these tasks. The configuration format is detailed in the local.conf. > >>>> sample.extended file. > >>>> > >>>> This patch also adds a function, set_user_group, which happens at > >>>> the end of the ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND. It handles the settings > >>>> in the USER_GROUP_SETTINGS variable. > >>> > >>> Why not use extra package just with user? > >>> > >>> See "[PATCH v3 0/5] Allow xuser to shutdown (cover letter only)" > >> > >> The issue is that the users don't want extra (empty) packages to just add > >> standard users/groups. What they want is a post image-generation > >> "configuration" mechanism. > >> > >> Adding users/groups is one of the basic items that they want/need. This > >> really > >> has to be considered to be an administrative activity vs a distribution > >> activity. (I.e. difference between creating a package and performing some > >> kind > >> of post-image action.) > >> > >> The other issue with a package based approach is it then mandates changes > >> occur > >> by having to rebuild/reinstall packages. This is onerous in my > >> experience, for > >> something basic like this. It's really outside of the package manager's > >> control. > > > > We can have all users in one package > > base-users (like we have base-files) > > > > It can allow someone to just define DEFAULT_USERS = "a b c" in > > local.conf and let base-users recipe to create all 3 automatically. > > > > Post image-generation mechanism doesn't allow to add new required users > > in "upgrade" or installing packages from binary feed with all required > > users accounts. > > > > That is exactly it.. these are not users that will -ever- be upgraded or > worked > on via packages. > > This is equivalent to saying "I'd like users bob, tracy and alice on this > image > I'm generating." > > It's NOT saying, all systems generated with this package feed will include > bob, > tracy and alice.
IMAGE_INSTALL += "base-user-bob base-user-tracy base-user-alice" > If the user wants to add john, after the initial image is generated, they > would > do so using the adduser functionality of the system (or modifying the > passwd/group files.) And what if john-the-ripper package in the feed needs john as system user and the same system user is also used by thc-hydra package? Should both include addusers/addgroup postinsts (like connman, xserver-nodm-init do without latest patchset)? > The fundamental problem is that the package feeds and district from the image > itself. The image is nothing more then an installer that happens to be > running > on the build machine itself. Things that are part of the distribution belong > in > the feed, things that are instance/image specific belong as part of the > installation process. > > --Mark -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
