Re: UID_MIN & GID_MIN changed

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

 



tor 2011-05-26 klockan 08:52 -0400 skrev Simo Sorce: 
> On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 07:39 +0200, Alexander BostrÃm wrote:

> > Personally I think UIDs and their relation to user accounts should be
> > treated as host-local. I also want a pony.
> 
> It would be nice, but then there is NFS ...

Oh yes I'm well aware. (Not sure about CIFS and various other network
filesystems but at least AFS prefers a global UID space.)

There's also the problem with roaming UID-capable filesystems, like ext4
on a USB drive.

I really think all of those should have some sort of mapping between the
filesystem's and LDAP server's internal user id and the host-local UID
space.

But yes, ponies. My point is that until the above exists admins really
do need to be prepared to deal with UID collisions caused by changes in
the OS or by switching between OS:es or machines. Therefore it is ok for
the OS to extend the reserved range from 500 to 1000. (It's a 31-bit
range for crying out loud, there's plenty of room.)

/abo


-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux