With Red Hat linux (and derivatives) useradd automatically creates a
group of the same name as the user.
Its easy to permit access to a single user using chgrp and chmod if you
are the file owner.
If you don't use Red Hat then perhaps you can convince your sysadmin to
create a group for each user manually.  At least then you don't have to
continually bug him/her.  (Of course a BOFH would balk at this
delegation of power :)

Now allowing multiple users to have access is a fish of another colour. 
I'm not sure if there is a way to avoid the sysadmin on that one.

Kerry.

On Thu, 2002-03-14 at 14:32, Ryurick M. Hristev wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Ryurick M. Hristev wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Rex Johnston wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 2002-03-13 at 10:07, Steve Brorens wrote:
> > > 
> > > > BTW I'd go so far as to say that the Windows (NT/W2K/XP/.NET) NTFS permission
> > > > structure is overall far superior to Linux <ducks flames>, BUT the
> > > 
> > > How exactly ?
> > 
> > Assume that one non-root user wants to give r|w access to a file|dir to
> > another one _only_. How do you solve this with standard Unix perms ?
> > (I've hit this problem several times, happens more often then one would
> > think).
> 
> To make myself clear: I want a solution not a workaround.
> 
> I could invent myself several kludges but AFAIK there is no solution
> other than begging the sysadmin for _each_ such case. The user can
> _not_ solve the problem by himself.  
> 
> Cheers,
> -- 
> Ryurick M. Hristev mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Computer Systems Manager
> University of Canterbury, Physics & Astronomy Dept., New Zealand


Reply via email to