On Monday 18 September 2006 07:35, Matthew Burgess wrote: > One thing I'm concerned about with Dan's proposal of aligning all the > users and groups up between the various *LFS books is of our motto > "Your distro, your rules". If we start mandating all the users and > groups that folks should have as part of a base system simply to > create consistency between the various LFS projects, which a reader > may or may not go on to refer to, there's an inherent lack of > flexibility there. Well, I suppose they're free to ignore our list, > but I'm still uncomfortable with specifying any more users/groups > than we have currently if they're not directly used by LFS packages.
I don't think he was proposing that we require LFSers to install a load of users, but simply to make sure the relation between user and group names and uids and gids is consistent across *LFS projects by having a list somewhere that _editors_ (rather than users) can refer to. Alex :-) -- Pippin Computer Monkey to the Pelican www.oxrev.org.uk, www.corpusjcr.org, www.rev.org.uk
pgp9gpJ6CeJM6.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
