On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 04:29:37AM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:18:00 +0100
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Uid 31 is reserved forever (speaking as the base-passwd maintainer), but
> > new installations of postgresql should have a uid in the system range,
> >
On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 02:18:00 +0100
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Uid 31 is reserved forever (speaking as the base-passwd maintainer), but
> new installations of postgresql should have a uid in the system range,
> namely 100-999, as created by 'adduser --system'. See the changelog for
>
Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Pre-Dependencies are supposed to be discussed at d-devel which I want
> to do now. If anybody objects I will just do it.
I have some reservations about using pre-dependencies on a package
like adduser. Since adduser was not designed as something that wo
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 08:27:17PM +0100, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> If any package that needs to add a user should always use adduser,
> should that not be a required package rather than just important?
The priority has nothing to do with how many packages use it; there is an
explicit definition in
I've just got home and read this thread. It's OK by me, Martin, to make
the change, in view of the tenor of the replies.
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 15:17, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hum, instead of adduser, useradd should be used by the posgresql
> > package.
Hi!
Am 2003-10-17 2:18 +0100 schrieb Colin Watson:
> Use adduser. It's your friend.
This is a word! :-) Fine, I'll make it so then.
Russell, thanks for your explanation, I know what you mean now.
Have a nice weekend!
Martin
--
Martin Pitt
home: www.piware.de
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 07:36, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > If you have an "optional" package depend on a package that is
> > "important" or "required" then again it would be a bug for any other
> > package to have a dependency that results in a circle leading back
> > to your package.
>
> This confuses me.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:36:04PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Please don't get me wrong, I don't insist of using adduser. IMHO
> Mathieu's solution of checking whether adduser is available is
> acceptable, if adduser is not installed then I can't break any admin
> preferences anyway. In addition,
Hi!
Please don't get me wrong, I don't insist of using adduser. IMHO
Mathieu's solution of checking whether adduser is available is
acceptable, if adduser is not installed then I can't break any admin
preferences anyway. In addition, user postgres has uid 31, thus
base-passwd should have given its
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:01, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Why would there be an issue on depending on a more important package?
> >
> > Having an optional/misc package pre-depend on an important/base package
> > seems like a non-issue to me.
>
> adduser is neither essential nor required, thus does not need
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 04:27:42PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 03:51:33PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > > > Hum, instead of adduser, useradd should be used by the posgresql
> >
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 04:27:42PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> > On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 03:51:33PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > > Hum, instead of adduser, useradd should be used by the posgresql
> > > package.
> > > useradd is included in the package
Mathieu Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
>> On 2003-10-16 21:39 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
>> > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:00, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> > > The package postgresql needs to use 'adduser' and 'addgroup' in its
>> > > preinst script to properly save
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 03:51:33PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> > > adduser is neither essential nor required, thus does not need to be
> > > installed when installing postgres. I'm not quite sure what you
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 03:51:33PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Hum, instead of adduser, useradd should be used by the posgresql
> package.
> useradd is included in the package passwd, which is "required" package
> from the "base" section.
Please ignore this dangerous moron.
--
.''`. ** Debia
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 03:51:33PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> > adduser is neither essential nor required, thus does not need to be
> > installed when installing postgres. I'm not quite sure what you mean,
> > could you please explain this?
> >
> > Th
Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> Hi Russell and all others,
>
> On 2003-10-16 21:39 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:00, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > > The package postgresql needs to use 'adduser' and 'addgroup' in its
> > > preinst script to properly save the current
Hi Russell and all others,
On 2003-10-16 21:39 +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:00, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > The package postgresql needs to use 'adduser' and 'addgroup' in its
> > preinst script to properly save the current database before upgrading
> > (cf. Bug #180199). Theref
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 19:00, Martin Pitt wrote:
> The package postgresql needs to use 'adduser' and 'addgroup' in its
> preinst script to properly save the current database before upgrading
> (cf. Bug #180199). Therefore it should pre-depend on 'adduser'.
Why would there be an issue on depending on
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 07:24:21PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:00:47AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> > Pre-Dependencies are supposed to be discussed at d-devel which I
> > want to do now. If anybody objects I will just do it.
>
> Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose
Hi!
On 2003-10-16 19:24 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:00:47AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
>
> > Pre-Dependencies are supposed to be discussed at d-devel which I want
> > to do now. If anybody objects I will just do it.
>
> Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of disc
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 11:00:47AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Pre-Dependencies are supposed to be discussed at d-devel which I want
> to do now. If anybody objects I will just do it.
Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of discussing these sorts of things?
As it stands, I don't see a problem
22 matches
Mail list logo
