rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx said: > Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx said: > > > The only reason for not wanting to remove accounts on package removal to me > > > is "accounts leaving stray files somewhere". > > > > > However, rpms should have always have control over all files it owns. > > > > Well, there are many cases of packages producing some files while they run, > That's why I said "should". > > It is possible in many cases (%postun, %ghost or %triggerun scripts), but > won't be possible or useful in all cases. > > E.g. I would not want an mysql update remove my mysql data bases. Which is precisely why I think the ID should not be automatically removed... Yes, I also used "should" :-) There certainly are packages where removing the ID is fine, but I think the general rule should be conservative. > > which they will not own. E.g., > > > > root: rpm -qf /var/log/mysqld.log.4 > > file /var/log/mysqld.log.4 is not owned by any package > > root: ls -l /var/log/mysqld.log.4 > > -rw-r----- 1 mysql mysql 0 Aug 7 03:02 /var/log/mysqld.log.4 > > > > So I think the UID should stay... until the sysadm removes it. > IMO, this is an example where removing files is possible: > > E.g. > > %postun > rm -f /var/log/mysqld.log* I agree. I only spent a few seconds looking for some valid example of unowned files. But I suspect there are tougher nuts. Christian -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
