Re: Rational for debian group accounts
On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Manong Dibos wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > I used to think usergroups were lame as well until I finally read the
> > rationale somewhere (I think in some Red Hat documentation). We should
> > more explicitly spell this out in our own docs.
>
> Could you please refer me to the relevant redhat docs? Hopefully an url?
> I understand groups somewhat, but Im certainly not a power user of groups.
I have it in hard copy form, see if you can find the Red Hat "System
Administration" guide -- it's printed as part of the manual that ships with
their CD-ROMs. I'm sure it's on electronic form somewhere, as it's
obviously a TeX document -- try their ftp site.
> Right now I use groups to give users access to certain classes of
> programs, or even to individual programs, on a case by case basis. Is
> this the correct way to use groups? Am I missing something?
If it works for you and controls access the way you want, it's correct.
What you're doing is pretty much the traditional method of handling groups.
> > administrator. But with usergroups added to that (automatically with
> > adduser), you get finer granularity of control within the multi-user group.
>
> Yes, I am very curious why every user needs their own "group"...
It's been explained in this thread already; I shouldn't waste bandwidth
repeating it.
--
G. Branden Robinson | If you make people think they're
Purdue University | thinking, they'll love you;
branden@purdue.edu | but if you really make them think,
http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | they'll hate you.
--
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: