Reindl Harald wrote: > one of the odd defaults many are not using > > why should i have a group with the name of my user > if it has only one user - or why should i put the > user "caroline" in group "harry" except for chaos > > no idea who invented this silly default, however, do not > assume all people are using defaults all the time For what it’s worth, the Red Hat Linux 7.3 manual at ftp://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/7.3/en/doc/RH-DOCS/pdf-en/rhl-rg-en.pdf section 6.4.1 gives the official rationale. It’s definitely a Red Hat-ism, but there is some thought behind it. Briefly, it’s because if you have a group shared directory (where users in that group can edit all the files in the directory), you want the default umask to be 002, which makes new files get rw-rw-r-- permissions by default, and new subdirectories get rwxrwxr-x. (If the directory has the group SUID bit set, then by default everything created in that directory will inherit the same group). But that means that files in your home directory also get rw-rw-r-- permissions, which is Not a Good Thing if anyone else is in the same group. So you need a per-user group to keep home directories safe. James. -- E-mail: james@ | "Yes, it's one those irregular verbs: I have an aprilcottage.co.uk | individual mind, you are eccentric, he is completely | round the twist." -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
