Lucas C. Villa Real wrote: > On 4/25/07, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 08:59:20 +0200, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On 4/24/07, Lucas C. Villa Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> While checking the bugs reported by Peter I noticed that useradd (the >>>> one from Shadow package, invoked by AddUser) automatically creates a >>>> group with the same name as the username supplied in the command line. >>>> Is that really needed, as we have the 'users' group common to >>>> everyone? I would vote for removing it, but I'd just like to hear your >>>> opinion first. >>>> >>> I say keep it. Groups are cheap. >>> >> Why is it used? What is the advantage of having one group per user? >> Especially when groups can't be members of other groups. > > A file configured to be owned by foo:foo would be equivalent to > configuring it to be owned by foo:users with group bits set to zero, > so I really don't see a reason to have this kind of group by default..
I totally agree. I can't see any point in having one group per user. -- /Jonatan [ http://kymatica.com ] _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
