On Wednesday, 8 April 2020 4:43:32 PM AEST Topi Miettinen wrote: > On 8.4.2020 5.19, Russell Coker wrote: > > What kind of name is that? It's a poor choice of name by systemd upstream > > and I don't think we are obliged to copy that bad idea. > > The name is related to environment variable XDG_USER_RUNTIME_DIR, which > is not systemd specific construct: That's a fine name for an environment variable, clearly indicating that it points to a directory. It's a poor name for a domain, making a casual observer think it's a type for a directory not a domain for a process. > https://specifications.freedesktop.org/basedir-spec/basedir-spec-latest.html > > So if the name should change, xdg_user_runtime_dir_t might be more > accurate. It would be more accurate to have a name that reflects the function of managing the directory in question. > On the other hand, the current name reflects that it's > specifically the service supplied by systemd called > "runtime-user-dir@.service" which provides the directory. If the > provider would be something other (/etc/init.d/elogind-mkuserdir), it > could be equally accurate to label the directory with something else. If the provider changed to a different process (theoretically we are supposed to be able to swap out parts of systemd for equivalents) then it should have the same domain name. > Though if the result (temporary directory owned by the user) is no > different in either case from the point of view of SELinux policy, why > change? SE Linux is difficult enough to understand without making things needlessly confusing. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
