mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx (Matthew Miller) writes: >> That's not possible. Only the range 0-99 is reserved for fixed user >> ids. All other ranges are free for local uses. For example the range >> 100-499 mentioned in another posting: every third party package which >> adds user, or just a simple 'useradd -r' will assign the next unused >> uid in this area. So you can not assign fixed UIDs in this range as it >> *will* cause conflicts. >> >> Using another UID range will be similarly; it may be/is possible that >> this range is used on some system. > > Yes, but the range under 500 is already defined as "special". I don't think > it's unreasonable for a certain subset of that to be now marked as reserved > for Fedora Extras packages. We could make it start at 300 to be less likely > to conflict with random "useradd -r" done earlier. Assigning fixed IDs in this range would violate LSB which states | The system User IDs from 100 to 499 should be reserved for dynamic | allocation by system administrators and post install scripts using | useradd. [http://www.linuxbase.org/spec//book/LSB-generic/LSB-generic/uidrange.html] That's why it would be a bad idea when Fedora Extras claims fixed UIDs there. I agree with you that every large organisation has its assigned UID ranges and it will not be possible to find a free range which can be assigned to Fedora Extras. Perhaps we could find such a range in the 32bit UID space which is allowed by Linux; but I am not sure whether we cause portability problems. Enrico
Attachment:
pgpD7WwskVtKr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
