Article View: comp.std.unix
Article #324Re: UIDs and GIDs
From: Sean Fagan
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 1990 18:15
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 1990 18:15
23 lines
1421 bytes
1421 bytes
From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan)
In article <743@longway.TIC.COM> mbrown@osf.org (Mark Brown) writes:
>In 1003.1, "User ID" is defined as a positive integer (so is GID)...
>Also, uid_t is defined as an arithmetic type (same for gid_t).
>How does one handle (or can one handle) certain networking conventions that
>use a "dummy" user ("nobody") and require a user id of -2 ?
>Do these conflict as they seem, or am I missing something (always possible..)
Certain networking conventions are broken.
uid_t and gid_t have usually (always?) been considered unsigned shorts.
Most architectures let them get away with it, barely. It is not a good
idea, though.
---
-----------------+
Sean Eric Fagan | "Just think, IBM and DEC in the same room,
seanf@sco.COM | and we did it."
uunet!sco!seanf | -- Ken Thompson, quoted by Dennis Ritchie
(408) 458-1422 | Any opinions expressed are my own, not my employers'.
Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 64
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<751@longway.TIC.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unixReferences:
<743@longway.TIC.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix From: seanf@sco.COM (Sean Fagan) Newsgroups: comp.std.unix Subject: Re: UIDs and GIDs Message-ID: <751@longway.TIC.COM> Date: 29 Jun 90 18:15:05 GMT References: <743@longway.TIC.COM> Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. Lines: 23 Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)