On Sat, Jun 24, 2023 at 01:22:22AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
I don't think so. Either way, the actual implementation is going
to be a call to
systemd-sysusers. But the rpm-internal approach is quite different in how the
call is constructed from the macro-based approach, so the failure modes are
likely to be different. If were to switch to the macro-based approach
temporarily, we'd create quite a lot of churn and _different_ failure modes. So
I think that if we're switching to sysusers as the implementation, we should go
for the intended final approach immediately.
My thinking was that the failure modes would then be limited to the switch to
systemd-sysusers only so we wouldn't have to debug two new implementations
(systemd-sysusers and RPM's integration) but just one (systemd-sysusers).
That said, having slept on it, I agree that such a two-staged approach would
just make things needlessly more chaotic. Just switching the whole thing as
proposed is going to be simpler, yup :)
--
Michal Domonkos / RPM dev team / Red Hat, Inc.