| Summary: | Allocate a 'katello' username and groupname | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Reporter: | Justin Sherrill <jsherril> |
| Component: | setup | Assignee: | Ondrej Vasik <ovasik> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | qe-baseos-daemons |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 6.3 | CC: | azelinka, cpelland |
| Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
| Target Release: | 6.3 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | setup-2.8.14-15.el6 | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2012-06-20 12:23:51 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Bug Depends On: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 750334 | ||
|
Description
Justin Sherrill
2012-03-16 20:13:27 UTC
Do you really need this static id reservation? Rpmdiff failure is only indicator - static id is required for network facing/communicating system accounts and daemons handling sensitive data - is it the case of this system account? If not, rpmdiff failure could be waived (static id range is limited). Hey Ondrej, "Rpmdiff failure is only indicator - static id is required for network facing/communicating system accounts and daemons handling sensitive data" I believe this is the case. This is a network service that is holding user and system information, so I would consider that 'sensitive data'. I don't know that this is Z-stream worthy either. As long as a UID is picked, we can use that UID knowing it will be reserved in the future. Thanks, -Justin Thanks, I'll reserve 182:182 for katello. Removing z-stream request... Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0778.html |