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

Re: weekly policy summary

On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 08:36:51PM -0800, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 03, 1999 at 07:29:20PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Section 3.2 should not allow static user ids (except root=0) (#43483)
> >   * Stalled.
> >   * Proposed by Andreas Jellinghaus; seconded by Joseph Carter.
> >   * Policy currently allows for static uid' to be hardcoded into
> >     daemons. The proposal is to change that so only dynamic uid's may
> >     be used.
> Another call for support..  LSB is likely to mandate this anyway for
> portability reasons.  Making programs that depend on static UIDs at
> compile time use whatever UID the system has at runtime isn't usually
> hard.  It can even be done with qmail (though DJB might sputter about it a
> lot..)

Note that LSB will be mandating this for applications, not distributions.
I'd also be very curious as to how much coding it'd require to get this
to actually work. Would someone care to change all their <1000 uids/gids
to 10xxx or similar, and see what breaks?


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgpjscll_kBv8.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: