Martin Pool wrote: > On 13 Dec 2002, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Dec 13, 2002, "Terry Griffin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Find attached a patch that adds Red Hat-style xinetd and SysV-init >> scripts to the packaging subdirectory. By getting these in to the >> standard tarball I can get better turn-around time on Red Hat RPM >> packages for each new distcc release. >> >> Eeek. I'd *never* run distcc as a user as privileged as daemon. If >> anything, a new user should be created for distccd, and distccd should >> run under permissions of that user. > > I strongly agree with Alexandre. > > The Debian packages add a "distccd" unprivileged user. > >> FWIW, I've been building distcc RPMS for 8.0 too, at >> ftp://people.redhat.com/aoliva/rpms/8.0/ > > Thanks, I'll add a link. >
Okay. I'm convinced. Attached is a new patch which, as a temporary measure, uses the "nobody" user, which seems to work fine on the Red Hat hosts I can currently get my paws on. I think my earlier problems with the nobody user may have been the result of a subtle lack of understanding about how distcc works, which has since been corrected. In any case I can't repeat the earlier problem. If anyone is aware of specific problems with using nobody for distccd on *any* version of Red Hat, I'd appreciated hearing about it. In the mean time I'll explore the packaging implications of created a dedicated account. Terry -- Terry Griffin Axian Inc. http://www.axian.com/
distcc-0.15-rhl-2.patch
Description: Binary data
