Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 20:48:59 -0400 From: Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, sheldonh@FreeBSD.org Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Add generic username for 3rd-party MTA's Message-ID: <19990901204859.B14974@mad> In-Reply-To: <19990902003928.A33233@keltia.freenix.fr>; from Ollivier Robert on Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 12:39:28AM %2B0200 References: <17825.936203586@axl.noc.iafrica.com> <19990902003928.A33233@keltia.freenix.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Sep 02, 1999 at 12:39:28AM +0200, Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Sheldon Hearn: > > I plan to add a user ``smtp'' with UID 25 and a member of group > > ``mail'', for use in running non-priveledged MTA's in FreeBSD. This is > > primarily for the convenience of maintainers of mail ports. Will ports adapt easily to this? Having ports add their own users and groups is fairly trivial. Using a single user:group could make some of the ports less standard (eg. most of the world does not run qmail under user ``smtp'' or group ``mail''). OTOH, I can see that having a common user:group would be useful and make some things easier, too. [I'm not saying I'm opposed; I'm asking if it really makes sense for the ports to use a single mta user:group ... I know some authors (<cough> djb, of qmail [in]famy) would probably try to prohibit us from using a single user:group]. -- This is my .signature which gets appended to the end of my messages. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990901204859.B14974>