Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:30:23 +0100 From: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> To: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default value for UIDs Message-ID: <BANLkTinQYESEEtG8mE_oe_VPYCQZtbdjjQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110628165911.GC44024@dan.emsphone.com> References: <BANLkTimw9c_jYCeomW50EckGpsP9Gv574Q@mail.gmail.com> <20110628165911.GC44024@dan.emsphone.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28 June 2011 17:59, Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> wrote: > In the last episode (Jun 28), Chris Rees said: >> Hi all, >> >> [crees@zeus]~% tail -n 2 /usr/ports/UIDs >> dbxml:*:949:949::0:0:dbXML user:/nonexistent:/sbin/nologin >> nobody:*:65534:65534::0:0:Unprivileged user:/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nolog= in >> [crees@zeus]~% grep crees /etc/passwd >> crees:*:1001:1001:Chris Rees:/home/crees:/bin/tcsh >> chris:*:1001:1001:Chris Rees:/home/crees:/bin/tcsh >> [crees@zeus]~% >> >> I'm a little concerned at how close the ports UIDs are getting to the >> username space... > > There are only 216 entries in UIDs, though, so if people are just using > "last entry + 1" when adding new ones, they should probably start filling > the gaps instead. =A0The 100s and 200s are pretty dense, but 350-399 only= has > 5 entries, 400-499 has 4, 600-699 has 7, 700-799 has 3, etc. > Thank you for pointing that out (d'oh). However, perhaps we could still address the *potential* problems. To use one example, Debian has (as long as I can remember) used 10001 for the first username. When we have 65535 - 99 UIDs to play with, expansion like this isn't a problem. Could it be worth it? Think of ten years down the line. Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTinQYESEEtG8mE_oe_VPYCQZtbdjjQ>