Re: UID Registry
Bart Whiteley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.lsb.discuss |
|---|---|
| Organization | Novell, Inc. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I would prefer the opposite solution (let LANANA be the common registry). For example: Currently among the major distributions you can find users "apache", "httpd", "www", or "wwwrun". All of them have different UIDs. This makes it a challenge to develop applications intended to run on multiple distributions. On Tuesday 10 June 2003 07:55 am, George Kraft wrote: > Per bug 695338, the LSB Specification Authority has removed the registry > requirement for UIDs. > > On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 16:44, Bart Whiteley wrote: > > http://www.linuxbase.org/spec/refspecs/LSB_1.3.0/gLSB/gLSB/uidrange.html > > > > Shouldn't LANANA be this "common registry"? > > I think this would be a useful role for LANANA. > > RCS file: /cvsroot/lsb/spec/gLSB/usersgroups/usersgroups.m4,v > retrieving revision 1.17 > retrieving revision 1.18 > diff -r1.17 -r1.18 > 115,116c115,116 > < The system UIDs from 0 to 99 should be statically allocated by the > system. > < These static assignments should be defined by a common registry. > --- > > > The system UIDs from 0 to 99 should be statically allocated by the > > system, > > > and not created by applications. -- Bart Whiteley <[email protected]> Novell, Inc., the leading provider of information solutions http://www.novell.com/