GNU bug report logs - #32413
25.2; When run as root, emacs writes dconf files in a non-root user's /run/user/XXX directory

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Vincent Lefevre <vincent <at> vinc17.net>

Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 09:31:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: notabug

Found in version 25.2

Done: Noam Postavsky <npostavs <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Vincent Lefevre <vincent <at> vinc17.net>
Cc: 32413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#32413: 25.2; When run as root, emacs writes dconf files in a non-root user's /run/user/XXX directory
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 16:47:17 +0300
> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:57:58 +0200
> From: Vincent Lefevre <vincent <at> vinc17.net>
> Cc: 32413 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > > Emacs should never create files/directories if the user hasn't
> > > explicitly asked it to do that
> > 
> > I don't agree with this principle, not in this general form.  (The "in
> > a directory owned by another user" part, to which I think I agree, as
> > written, was not a qualification for this general statement, so it
> > doesn't count for the purposes of the principle itself.)
> > 
> > As just one random example of what Emacs "should never do", we write
> > the customizations to a file "without the user's explicit request".
> 
> I don't understand why there is anything to write if the user
> hasn't customized anything.

That was just an example of something that doesn't explicitly ask for
writing a file.  Another example is Eshell: when it exits, it writes
files in the ~/.eshell directory.

More generally, certain Emacs features might write files "without user
explicitly asking" as part of providing some feature that needs to be
persistent between sessions.  I think that's quite allright, which is
why I disagree with the general principle you were trying to
establish.

> And if the user introduces some customization, then this can be
> regarded as an explicit write operation (due to the action of the
> user in this sense).

Well, in that case, let's regard user using dconf as an explicit write
permission ;-)

Seriously, though: if your principle can be subverted in some
situations, then we need to define what situations are those.  In
particular, how is what you report different from what Eshell does on
exit?




This bug report was last modified 6 years and 340 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.