On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 22:12:53 +0100, Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > enrico.scholz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx said: > > 2. Using fedora-usermgmt is optional, not a requirement. > > Which is why it should be packaged as a replacement/alternative > of plain useradd for those that actually want it, and not as an additional > package Require'd by FE packages (as has been mentioned several times in this > thread) If you don't make it a requirement, it becomes unreliable at installation time, since it may or may not be available prior to a package which would use it in its scriptlets. The bad thing about that would be that an administrator, who does have enabled fedora-usermgmt to remap uids/gids, would need to ensure proper installation order himself. > > 3. nobody will be hurted; fedora-usermgmt is minimal, non-intrusive and > > without bad technical sideeffects > > Famous Last Words (tm) I agree with that. This thread has entered sort of a deadlock, because it loops back and forth between multiple issues. After plenty of postings, somebody still comes and denies that there is a problem that fedora-usermgmt solves. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
