* Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> [2008-12-12 01:54:26]:

> Florent Daigni?re skrev:
> > * Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> [2008-12-11 19:06:26]:
> >   
> >> Matthew Toseland skrev:
> >>     
> >>> Zero3 is very keen that we should run from the start menu from the 
> >>> installing 
> >>> user, rather than installing a service. This has a number of advantages:
> >>> - It will be possible to kill Freenet from Task Manager. Not being able 
> >>> to 
> >>> kill Freenet from Task Manager likely alienates a lot of users IMHO.
> >>> - We would not need to provide a script to disable autostart: advanced 
> >>> users 
> >>> would just move it away from the start menu, and non-advanced users would 
> >>> just uninstall it (as they do now).
> >>> - Fewer permissions problems, no dedicated Freenet user.
> >>> - WHEN we have a tray icon, we can start it at the same time.
> >>>
> >>> There are however some disadvantages:
> >>> - Marginally less uptime if there is a login screen and the user doesn't 
> >>> log 
> >>> in immediately. This may be disproportionately significant however in 
> >>> terms 
> >>> of performance in some cases: IF the user starts using Freenet 
> >>> immediately 
> >>> after logging in, the extra few seconds would have been rather helpful.
> >>> - The user actually needs to log in. We can't just tell them to keep 
> >>> their 
> >>> computers on 24x7 to run Freenet if it doesn't start until they log in. 
> >>> This 
> >>> could perhaps be significant.
> >>> - Less uptime when other users are using the computer.
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >> We can add the shortcut for all users, but the problem is that the node 
> >> will restart during user switch, which is indeed quite bad.
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > You are not seriously suggesting that, are you?
> >
> > Won't that start two nodes?
> > Won't that mess up the filesystem permissions? (say you logon admin
> > first, logoff and then log back on again as user)
> >
> >   
> 
> Yes, I am.
> 
> I haven't looked into if the wrapper handles multiple executions, but if 
> it doesn't, it's a one line job in browse.cmd or whatever launcher we 
> would use (if process exists, don't run it again).
> 
> It will not mess up file system permissions.

At the moment users manage to mess-up file permissions even though
freenet is run from a dedicated non-priviledged user account they
shouldn't have access to!

>  How do you suggest it would?

Start the node as a user, shut it down, login as admin, start the node
up... it creates new files, shut it down... then the user doesn't have
access to the newly created files.

> By default, all administrators (which initial user is created as, 
> and is default for all new users) have read-write access to the program 
> files folder. Limited users do not by default, but that can be fixed 
> with a single command as well.
> 

By default limited-users can access other limited users's files or
administrator's files. The node does create new files and needs to be
able to access them; regardless of "who" started it!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081212/9ddad951/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to