Previously Alan Cox wrote: > Customers want <100 Sadly it seems that 99 uids won't be enough in the future, especially now that people are realizing that you should not run everything as daemon or nobody... Debian has reserved 100-999 for `dynamically allocated system users and groups', and we only put things in 0-99 that should always be present on a system. This has worked quite well for us. > Do we allocate a range very high in 32bit uid space as well ? Discuss 8) Debian has reserved the range 60000-64999 for packages that need static uids. (ie weird things like qmail which insist on setting a uid at compile-time). It's not used a lot though (qmail, fidogate, mysql and netplan only). > We should be narrowly focused. And when you consider the narrowness of focus > then we shouldnt be specifying this at all. It doesn't matter if I am right > or you are right - its end user policy, its going to vary and therefore > applications have to work regardless. Therefore we gain nothing but annoyed > users by specifying it.. It would be nice to have a way (or range) for dynamically created system accounts so software can use that. And we probably need a list of uids/gids that should be present on all systems (audio, video, cdrom, utmp, etc.) Wichert. -- ________________________________________________________________ / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | wichert@liacs.nl http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Attachment:
pgp2F9XiJazFV.pgp
Description: PGP signature