Re: static UID/GID?
On Oct 15, Marco Budde <Marco.Budde@hqsys.antar.com> wrote:
>directory. We've agreed on using the UID ftn. The ifmail maintainer
>suggests using the GID uucp, because this is the ifmail standart. Is this
>a good idea? In my opinion it's not a good idea, because the Fido programs
>have nothing in common with uucp. And ifmail use uucp as standart GID,
>because a lot of Linux distributions use uucp as GID for the serial/modem
>devices. But we use dialout as GID.
Ifmail has never been sgid uucp, this is not the true rationale.
>Therefor I would suggest that we use the group ftn, because for example
>the news daemons have their own GID, too. And the UID ftn would be member
Ifmail does not needs any additional GID, and AFAIK neither fidogate does.
>of the ftn and the dialout group. Is this a good resolution?
ftn should be a member of the dialout group, but it does not needs any
new group. If fidogate needs a group for security reasons then you should
use ftn, otherwise I don't think we need another group, uucp works fine.
>And should we use a dynamically created UID/GID or a static one? I think
>that we should use a static one, because it's used by more than one
>program (at the moment 3 programs).
I don't know. Now ifmail uses a dynamically created UID, and I can't think
any reason it should be statically allocated.
--
ciao,
Marco
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: