ubuntu-phone team mailing list archive

[Oliver Grawert <ogra@xxxxxxxxxx>]

hi,
Am Samstag, den 03.05.2014, 13:26 +0200 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> Oliver Grawert [2014-05-03 13:14 +0200]:
> > the customization kit is exactly for the purpose that everyone uses the
> > same base image, has reliably the same bugs etc and can only customize
> > what we allow.
> 
> Ah, thanks for the heads-up. So this is more like the "branding" kind
> of customization, not larger changes.
> 
well, its a bit more than branding ... its also modifying behavior ...
(i.e. disabling mediascanner was mentioned earlier)

> > allowing init system overrides seems gross while allowing to change a
> > switch in a handfull of /etc/default files (or any other config
> > mechanism that allows this without full write access to the whole init
> > system) seems a lot easier to control for us.
> 
> Enabling/disabling a service is the presence/absence of a single
> symlink. That's a boolean yes/no, while default files often also
> contain actual service configuration changes. So if we want to prevent
> changing jobs/unit definitions and just allow
> setting/removing/disabling symlinks, we'd need to restrict
> writeability to e. g. /etc/systemd/system/*.wants/ .
> 
> But even with the ability to disable arbitrary services you can
> already ruin/change the user experience quite a bit, so we still need
> to be careful there what we allow there.

right and i think it is easier to restrict via a limited mechanism that
sits on top than by giving full access to the init system and then
limiting this again  :)

ciao
	oli

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part