Re: UID allocation policy [Re: automatic adduser/addgroup ...]
Lukas Nellen writes [ SuperCite undone - iwj ]:
> Ian Jackson <email@example.com> writes:
> > It seems to me that sensible defaults which break fewest things are to
> > have dynamically allocated system ids to go from 100-999, and
> > dynamically allocated ids for users to go from 1000-9999. 10000-59999
> > is by default reserved for any special purposes we can come up with
> > later (but we promise that they'll be dynamically allocated too).
> As I tried to argue before, that scheme breaks (IMHO) on a lot of existing
> clusters of UN*X workstations. There, the precedence is that regular
> user accounts start at 100 or 101 and go upwards. How do you want to
> integrate a debian box using your proposed scheme into such an
Edit /etc/adduser.conf appropriately, before installing packages that
create dynamic system users. Such packages can probably have their
uids reallocated after installation, if some care is taken.
> Especially, as soon as NIS or something else gets used to
> share /etc/passwd among the clients you are forced to use identical
> UIDs for all shared accounts.
> The only way out I see is to use a different range for dynamically
> allocated system accounts and fix the software that gets broken by
With my proposal there won't be any software that gets broken, apart
from those that insist (for example) that system ids are lower than
user ones - but we can't avoid breaking them in these environments
> That will only affect a few developers compared to affecting a
> lot of system adminstrators who will have to fix their existing
> installation to accomodate debian systems. [Or decree that no debian
> system which is member of a heterogeneous cluster is allowed to
> install packages which require dynamically allocated system accounts
> :-) ]
I think you've misunderstood my proposal.