I just created a local user named "0" (don't ask), and noticed that although we can do things like "chown +0:+0 file" to FORCE a file to be owned by uid 0 (rather than the uid of my unfortunate "0" username), it's a bit harder to learn details about a uid hidden by a poor username.
$ id 0 uid=14987(0) gid=14987(0) groups=14987(0) $ id +0 id: +0: no such user Of course, everyone "knows" that uid 0 is named "root", but this question applies to any other unfortunate uid/name collision. Therefore, I propose that we support 'id +0' as the way to say 'give me the details about uid 0, no matter if username 0 also happens to exist'. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
