On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 10:15:45PM -0400, Jyri Virkki wrote:
>
> On Aug 10, 2008, at 7:30 AM, Ceri Davies wrote:
>
>> It could be a matter of education, or the project could choose to make
>> the problem go away and have an advantage over the competition. I'm not
>> sure why we wouldn't choose the latter. I'm hoping that the Linux
>> familiarity project doesn't extend to bug compatibility for its own
>> sake.
>
> Personally I don't really care that much, it'll work either way[1].
>
> I'm just curious to hear what is the "problem" for the case where the uid
> owns either no files or files with content which isn't interesting to
> share. Proof by assertion isn't terribly convincing so I remain curious.
> You describe this as a bug in Linux (Debian, really; I haven't looked how
> the other distros handle it) but I'm not aware of a movement to change it
> (could well be I don't follow the right lists though) so doesn't seem to be
> a problem.
Actually, I'm not sure that this is a bug in Debian, because packages
are allowed to either dynamically allocate UIDs _or_ request a static
entry in the base-passwd package.
Either way, I'm on record with "dynamic UID allocation will cause
problems in my environment", so I'll let it rest.
Ceri
--
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
-- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/attachments/20080812/1cd3d404/attachment.bin>
