* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040315 15:00]: > > > ? I know that for me jradmin is clear immediately and for jnradmin if have > > to stop and think > > If possible jr_admin would seem even more intutive to me.
i am overwhelmed by all the creativity and thought going into this. i clearly underestimated this issue. (c: *smile* > But I'd have a nother question: Would it make sense to have GID > and UID Ranges instead of mixing regular groups into the user and private > group IDs beyond 10000? > > Maybe similar to the expample scheme[1] found on the net. > > OTH it may be perfectly fine to mix them, just a little harder > to "group the groups" :-) UID GID ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 0-500 OS assigned - I don't care 0-500 OS assigned - I don't care 500-600 Set aside for RH screwups 500-600 UPG for RH screwups 600-800 not currently assigned 600-800 UPG for same 800-900 system admins and "specials" 800-900 UPG for system admins 900-1000 wasted 900-1000 department special groups 1000-1200 wasted 1000-1200 normal groups 1200-1300 wasted 1200-1300 web server groups 1300-2000 wasted 1300-2000 future groups 2000-> normal users 2000-> UPG for normal groups i found this here. what i did not find was a good reasoning for having ranges for special groups/users like admins vs normal users etc. this is exactly what posix groups and ldap is good for: no need to care about this kind of stuff manually. what this guy writing this webpage is struggeling with is 1) redhat 2) solaris. (c:
