It would be interesting to know what is libuser used for. I was even thinking about retiring the package upstream, it's not like it's very widely used it seems..

In c8s it's a dependency for util-linux, usermode and passwd, which are all fairly core and low level packages. In the case of util-linux, it was added in 2.23 for chfn and chsh to support non-local accounts (e.g. LDAP).

In rhel8 devel packages were moved to separate repository.

I wonder whether this is the same issue as described here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1707919

CodeReady Builder is shipped as the PowerTools repo on CentOS 8 and CentOS Stream. The package appears to be also missing from there, see http://mirror.centos.org/centos/8-stream/PowerTools/x86_64/os/Packages/
I don't readily have access to RHEL to check if it's in CRB, but I'd wager it's probably not, as PowerTools should be a straight rebuild of it.

I can confirm that libuser-devel is currently only available in the internal buildroot.

Jakub, what did you mean about retiring the package upstream?  As Davide pointed out, it's a build requirement for passwd, usermode, and util-linux, in both RHEL and Fedora.

(In reply to Carl George 🤠 from comment #6)
> I can confirm that libuser-devel is currently only available in the internal
> buildroot.
> 
> Jakub, what did you mean about retiring the package upstream?  As Davide
> pointed out, it's a build requirement for passwd, usermode, and util-linux,
> in both RHEL and Fedora.

The question is whether this really justifies maintaining the full library or whether those projects could be satisfied by e.g. importing a bunch of helper source files. Minimizing the library while keeping it as a standalone library might be an option. But the reality is that we don't have much manpower behind libuser upstream at the moment.

Any update on this? fwiw, we're going to have to rebuild libuser as part of the CentOS Hyperscale SIG due to this, as we need to branch and rebuild util-linux there.

(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #9)
> Any update on this? fwiw, we're going to have to rebuild libuser as part of
> the CentOS Hyperscale SIG due to this, as we need to branch and rebuild
> util-linux there.

Davide, is your usecase solved by this being accessible in the Stream 8 buildroot?

https://koji.mbox.centos.org/pkgs/packages/libuser/0.62/23.el8/x86_64/libuser-devel-0.62-23.el8.x86_64.rpm

For the SIG, yeah, I think we'll sort this out via https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/316 for now, and ideally with some automation down the road.

In general, I still feel this (and other unshipped packages) should be distributed in a repo somewhere -- I wouldn't expect normal users to download them from Koji (or even know that Koji exists, for that matter). You may also want to update https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS8/UnshippedPackages

(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #13)
> For the SIG, yeah, I think we'll sort this out via
> https://pagure.io/centos-infra/issue/316 for now, and ideally with some
> automation down the road.
> 
> In general, I still feel this (and other unshipped packages) should be
> distributed in a repo somewhere -- I wouldn't expect normal users to
> download them from Koji (or even know that Koji exists, for that matter).
> You may also want to update
> https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/CentOS8/UnshippedPackages

A repo may be possible in the future but not a goal right now.  There's a balance between trying enable development like the SIG work and making sure we're giving guidance to long term solutions based on the upstream projects and the quality we expect.

The long term plan is to deprecate this library in Fedora and mark it deprecated in RHEL9 and remove it from future Fedora and RHEL10.
I think that we should not encourage customers to build a solution based on it. I would rather close it as "wontfix".


Josh, Amy, what do you think?

Ah, sorry, this is centos stream bug. We have the same for RHEL. We will ship devel package in centos stream.

My previous comment was about RHEL.

Tom

(In reply to Tomas Halman from comment #17)
> Ah, sorry, this is centos stream bug. We have the same for RHEL. We will
> ship devel package in centos stream.
> 
> My previous comment was about RHEL.

From a repo standpoint, Stream and RHEL are the same.  If we aren't going to ship this in a customer facing repo for RHEL, it won't be in a user facing repo for Stream.

Availability in the buildroot will be the answer if comment #16 covers our longer term plans with this package.  I'm going to mark this as CLOSED->WORKSFORME because there is a solution even if it isn't ideal and there's not really a better resolution.

After clarification in the team we decided that libuser-devel should be part of the CRB repository.

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 (libuser bug fix and enhancement update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2022:2040