Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] [SM-Users] [Cauldron] - 0.9.6 x86 ISO in rc1 - PPC coming soon

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • To: SM Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] [SM-Users] [Cauldron] - 0.9.6 x86 ISO in rc1 - PPC coming soon
  • Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 12:50:01 -0800 (PST)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 5 Mar 2006, Karsten Behrmann wrote:
<snip>
2)
The possibility to add new user is great. :-)
IMHO, the default group should be named identically to login
(lace:lace). Now it uses "users" by default.
Hmm... I'm not quite sure I'd personally agree with that. Wasn't the
purpose of group permissions to be a bit more granular that per-user?
It would make sense to give or take permissions to/from "all other human
users" or something, but why would you want group permissions for a group
that only you are in? Sure, there is root:root for normal files, but except
for that one I kindof don't see the purpose in one-user groups...
Feel free to disagree with me.

I believe the standard is <username>:users, as there is a users group
in /etc/group and, IMO, it'd be silly to populate /etc/group with a
group account for each user.

- -sandalle

- --
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEDKB9HXt9dKjv3WERArRvAJ9qJ9lfB9D75EhvJZnklRSoBucI1gCgmvQZ
ao4lz46qJW77LEWAJAlwjIA=
=/72M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page