cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Resolved] (CASSANDRA-3443) rpm should not remove user on uninstall
Date Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:55:12 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3443?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Jonathan Ellis resolved CASSANDRA-3443.
---------------------------------------

    Resolution: Invalid
    
> rpm should not remove user on uninstall
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-3443
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3443
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Packaging
>            Reporter: Mark Doliner
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: account, rpm, spec, user
>         Attachments: dont_remove_user_on_rpm_uninstall.diff
>
>
> Fedora's packaging guidelines state, "We never remove users or groups created by packages.
There's no sane way to check if files owned by those users/groups are left behind (and even
if there would, what would we do to them?), and leaving those behind with ownerships pointing
to now nonexistent users/groups may result in security issues when a semantically unrelated
user/group is created later and reuses the UID/GID. Also, in some setups deleting the user/group
might not be possible or/nor desirable (eg. when using a shared remote user/group database).
Cleanup of unused users/groups is left to the system administrators to take care of if they
so desire." (that's from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups)
> However, Cassandra's spec file in trunk and all branches contains this:
> {noformat}
> %preun
> # only delete user on removal, not upgrade
> if [ "$1" = "0" ]; then
>     userdel %{username}
> fi
> {noformat}
> I agree with Fedora's reasoning.  Additionally I'd like to add that stray accounts on
a system are generally relatively harmless.  I wonder if there was some intentional decision
to diverge from Fedora's (and presumably Red Hat's) customary behavior?  If not, I would suggest
removing the above scriptlet from the Cassandra spec file.  I'd be happy to provide a diff
if that would be useful.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message