Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#43305 - [filesystem] systemd-journal-remote and systemd-journal-upload needed
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Troy Engel (TE) - Friday, 02 January 2015, 15:40 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Sunday, 04 January 2015, 17:28 GMT
Opened by Troy Engel (TE) - Friday, 02 January 2015, 15:40 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Sunday, 04 January 2015, 17:28 GMT
|
DetailsDescription:
I randomly found two suspiciously high UID/GID systemd users on the system: systemd-journal-remote:x:998:998:systemd Journal Remote:/:/sbin/nologin systemd-journal-upload:x:997:997:systemd Journal Upload:/:/sbin/nologin This looks to be an extension of an older bug report (https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/38690), as that user which was added/fixed is listed in the same spots (now) upstream: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/sysusers.d/systemd-remote.conf https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/tmpfiles.d/systemd-remote.conf I think we need to add these to the post_upgrade() of the install section now? I'm not very familiar with this specific code to fully understand which piece of the puzzle dynamically created those two entries above, though. I think it's all done by 'systemd-sysusers' which seems to read the above files at runtime and make users: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/src/sysusers/sysusers.c Additional info: $ pacman -Q filesystem filesystem 2014.10-3 |
This task depends upon
Closed by Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Sunday, 04 January 2015, 17:28 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: No need to allocate static IDs for these users/groups
Sunday, 04 January 2015, 17:28 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't fix
Additional comments about closing: No need to allocate static IDs for these users/groups
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) -
Friday, 02 January 2015, 15:53 GMT
Why are these "suspiciously" high? What problem is caused by allowing systemd-sysusers to create these?
Comment by Troy Engel (TE) -
Friday, 02 January 2015, 16:39 GMT
Most likely not a problem at all (I don't use this feature to actually know), it's more about using static UID/GID for core system users to ensure that all systems have aligned systemd UIDs. Traditionally these are in 100-499 (per LSB spec) and we're already creating static UID/GID for the other systemd components in the 19x range, why not these two as well? This is more of an enhancement and less of a bug to keep everything aligned.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) -
Friday, 02 January 2015, 17:10 GMT
There's nothing "core" about these users. We've assigned static UIDs/GIDs in the past because there was a concern that these might need to be consistent across packages. Really not the case here.
Comment by Troy Engel (TE) -
Friday, 02 January 2015, 17:19 GMT
*nod* If you feel it's safe/non-issue, then let's just close this as a not-needed enhancement. It's more of an OCD alignment type of issue, as mentioned I'm not familiar enough with this exact functionality of systemd-journal to really know if it has any real life impact. I tried to check a few other systemd using distros for better insight into others packaging/setup but they all seem to be using an older systemd before these features (212 maybe?) were added.