On Do, 11.01.18 17:36, R P Herrold (herrold@xxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > > We are not taking the concept of this user/group away. We are also not > > taking the UID/GID assignment 65534 away, either. All we are doing is > > assigning it a better name and do so unconditionally, independently of > > whether nfsutils is installed or not, as the UID/GID 65534 has plenty > > uses outside of NFS. > > fixing something well and extensively documented, to something > 'new and improved' in the face of a huge and unchangeable set > of implementations (and third-party webbish documentation) > that cannot be changed: > > RO media > > off-line images > > backups > > iscsi targets > > NFS exports from third-party appliances > > SMB This is just FUDing around... It's a call for never improving and correcting systems, and if we subscribed to that we might as well stop developing Fedora altogether. I mean, let's not forget that by default the user 65534 has no name on Fedora. Only people who install NFS will get a name "nfsnobody" assigned currently. This means the UID is already differently set up on various Fedora systems, and our goal is to correct this for the future at least. Let me stress this: currently there's no clear rule on the name at all on Fedora, sometimes you get the name "nfsnobody" and sometimes you do not get any. If we now introduce a fixed name for the future, then things aren't really getting worse, as the assignment was never clear anyway. However, in the long run it *will* get better, as the name in upcoming Fedora versions will then be stable and defined unconditionally. > interop in hetergoneous environments This item particularly contradicts your own point. The "nfsnobody" thing is a Fedoraism/Redhatism. Distributions all differ on what they call the user/group, but more common is nobody:nobody or nobody:nogroup. Hence, there's no interop in heterogenous envs currently, we trying to normalize this a bit, by introducing a stable, more sensible name that is shared with at least some other distros too. > ... is this really worth the effort? All it does, like the > XKCD 'N+1 standards' cartoon, is add one more 'standard' that > cannot displace the incumbents and diverges from 'Unix' for > an, at best, cosmetic reason, as you state: > > All we are doing is assigning it a better name ... Yeah, a name that makes more sense than the old one. A name that is established unconditionally, and a name that might not be accepted by *all* distros, but certainly by more and wouldn't be a Fedoraism/Redhatism anymore... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
