[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Stephen White's proposal involving a `private' group

Stephen White writes:
> So, it looks like my proposal is still possible under a setgid system.
> Does it solve any problems that people had with groups per user?

I doubt it.  As Matthew Hannigan noted, the only way your proposal
appears to help is by reducing the size of the group file.

However, I may be somewhat biased; I have yet to see anyone point out
something I'd see as an actual problem (as opposed to a problem
someone had) with my proposal as it stood.

As I pointed out a day or two ago, your idea has serious disadvantages
for the behaviour - there are then operations that are fairly easy for
users to perform but very hard for them to reverse.  I won't even go
into the philosophical ugliness of it ...

> Remy - any news on BSD mounting being the kernel default?

I'm corresponding with Remy Card on the subject; he has agreed not to
go ahead with it until one of us has convinced the other or it has
become clear that we're not going to agree.

I'd rather not go into all the gory details here - private email is a
good way of resolving this kind of issue, as it can actually convince
people on occasion, and the temptation to flame is virtually

When we come to a conclusion (even if it's that we're not going to
come to one, IYSWIM) you'll definitely hear about it.


PS: I'm going to be away until after the Easter weekend.

PPS: Is it a feature of your mail software that it tructates subject
lines to 22 characters and uppercases them ?  It would be nice if you
could persuade it not to, because it tends to break the by-subject
sorting of messages etc. that one finds in eg. sophisticated

Reply to: