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

Re: NMU'ing for wishlist bugs? (aka: intent to NMU bind9)

* Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a (jfs@computer.org) wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 11:52:30AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > Not unless bind needs a static uid (which I can't see a reason for).
> > 
> But it's better for sysadmins if all their bind users are the same uid.
> Isn't so? Otherwise you might end with problems if you copy files from a
> DNS server to it's backup (all running Debian and with a 'bind' user),
> sharing files through NFS, tarring and taking them to a new
> installation...
> It's much better and is much more consistent. Would you please ask
> base-passwd maintainer for one?

No, don't.  If admins want it that way, admins will set it up that way.
By default, since the vast majority of people will *not* have bind
installed, do *not* require everyone have a user they will not use.

I would, however, ask that the user be asked before creating the user
(if that isn't already the case...) since not all admins will want it
either.  In fact, I feel that should be true for *all* user changes
(the admin should be asked first).  Setups with centralized user data
will require different things.  Obviously sensible testing should be
used to see if a user exists (not sure what is there now, obviously
grep'ing the passwd file doesn't cut it tho).


Attachment: pgphQa6ZgODJR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: