On 2022-07-24 21:56:28 (+0200), Johannes Löthberg wrote:
> I'm fine with it existing, and I would be fine with it being enabled
> in a vendor preset, but I'm against it being statically enabled in
> /usr.  This is not something that's critical for the regular
> functioning of the system, and so is not something I think users
> should have to mask to get rid of rather than be able to just disable
> it.

At the time of writing only fwupd [1] and systemd [2] make use of
systemd preset [3].
Could you elaborate on what you see as the fundamental difference (from
a user's perspective) between `systemctl disable --now <unit>` and
`systemctl mask --now <unit>`?

My reasons for the proposed vendor enabling would be:

* we are the vendor
* no complicated actions required in an .install file of
 archlinux-keyring to add a file to the administrative layer
 (/etc/systemd/) of a user system (if not using a systemd preset file)
* the disabling of a default unit is obvious to the user (by the
 existence of the /dev/null symlink)
* the unit's activation state survives damaging/removing the
  administration layer

> But daily seems a bit frequent to me.  Anything more frequent than
> weekly feels too often to me, and even that feels a bit frequent.

I have been looking at this issue from the perspective of "how can a
user system gain (mostly) functional keys before upgrading?" by looking
at these two scenarios:
1. "A key gains full trust and locally has marginal trust"
2. "A key's expiry date has been extended and is locally expired"

In 1. the duration between release of a new keyring to [core] and
release of a package that is signed by the now fully trusted key in any
of our repositories can be minutes and therefore may even affect systems
that are upgraded every few hours or once daily. With a daily timer we
could eradicate the issue in this scenario with a rule of "only add
packages signed with a key that gains full trust in a new version of
archlinux-keyring after one day of its move to [core]" (that is still a
big "if", as it relies on us doing the right thing).

In 2. let's assume that the release of a new archlinux-keyring is made
at least two days before expiry of the key (FWIW, we've had worse!).
The *persistent* daily timer (e.g. also directly triggered after having
the machine powered off for a longer while) would synchronize the keys
very likely before a system upgrade can be attempted.
Again, this assumes that we catch the expiry early enough (for which now
there is a proposed fix available, thanks to Brett [4] - thanks again
for working on that!) for systems being upgraded in short intervals
(e.g. daily) and do not have to emergy rebuild someone's packages (which
is usually also already too late for some users).

Best,
David

[1] https://archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/fwupd/
[2] https://archlinux.org/packages/core/x86_64/systemd/
[3] https://man.archlinux.org/man/systemd.preset.5
[4] 
https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/archlinux-keyring/-/merge_requests/127

-- 
https://sleepmap.de

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to