On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 19:53 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > What I think will most probably happen is that LSB will revise the > need and find that the weighing of static vs dynamic sytem accounts > which currently is 1:4 needs to be rethought Yeah - I doubt there are very many systems that have more UIDs in the 100-499 range than in the 0-99 range. > and maybe the bar lifted > from 100 to 150/200 or. What the LSB cannot do is touch anything > higher than 500 as that will break the users' playground (breaking > OSes is OK for the LSB ;) > > To cut a long story short: We are currently allowed to use 100-499 for > dynamic assignment, but we will most probably have to violate the LSB > if a static uid/gid is needed as the range reserved for that is filled > up. So it makes sense to think about moving dynamic allocation of > uid/gid from the lower range to the upper range. E.g. the first > useradd -r grabs 499, the next 498 and so on. That way dynamic > allocation will not conflict with any (new) static assignments. That > scheme is therefore future proof (at least more than the current) and > will also survive any raising of the uid=100 border. I like that model. I also would like it, unless specifically told not to, to only grab a UID if the same GID is also available. IE if GID 499 is in use but UID 499 is not, don't use UID 499 and GID 498 - instead, use UID and GID 498 and leave UID 499 unused. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
