Hi, have a read of http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/oneiric/man8/usermod.8.html
(usemod is pretty unchanged ever, as it is a 'core' Linux tool and applies across all versions and flavours - Debian / Red Hat based). I prefer to write down the user / group hierarchy on paper to envision how the users apply to groups, you can either use the usermod function (always use the *-aG* and not just -*G* or -*g* for 'adding' [appending] a user to groups). I also prefer to use the CLI usermod command, but you can do all these tasks with the menu --> System Tools --> Users and Groups, which is the GUI for usermod. Regards, Phill. On 21 January 2013 02:50, Ioannis Vranos <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:40 AM, John Hupp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > OK, thanks to all who have responded so far. > > > > From the several responses here and additional reading, I'm glad to come > to > > the understanding that there is only one set of user/group configuration > > information (/etc/passwd, /etc/group and /etc/shadow), though it can be > > managed by different available tools. (This in contrast to network > > configuration, which really does support two different configuration > > systems.) > > > > For a case where it is desirable for a couple users to work with the same > > set of files, I'm now thinking that my fundamental approach was not quite > > right and that I do not need to involve or maybe should not involve the > > "users" system group. > > > > What I'm now thinking should be the setup: > > 1) Assign /home/user1 as the co-home directory for user2. > > 2) Assign user2 to the user1 group as user2's *primary* group. > > 3) Leave the ownership of /home/user1 as Owner: user1 and Group: user1. > > With the /home/user1 permissions such that owner and group can edit, > user1 > > and user2 should then be able to freely create, access and edit > everything > > in /home/user1. > > 4) Delete /home/user2. > > > > I expect then that this would solve my original problem in which new > > sub-folders did not inherit ownership by the "users" group. And maybe > > better respects Linux design principles. > > > > Is that a good and workable proposed setup? Is there any obvious > > consideration I am missing? > > > Linux ownership also includes SetUID, and SetGID. > > If SetUID is set for an executable, then when any user runs this file, > it is as if the user set by SetUID is running the file. > > If SetGID is set for an executable, it is as if the user that runs it, > belongs to the group specified by SetGID. > > > If SetGID is set for a directory, then all files created in this > directory, by any user, have their group ownership set to the group > specified by SetGID, and not to the primary group of the user that > creates the file. > > So, I think in your situation, a nice approach is to add user1 and > user2 to group "users" (NOT as their primary group), and then set the > SetGID attribute of their common directory to "users". > > > -- > Ioannis Vranos > > http://cppsoftware.binhoster.com > > -- > Lubuntu-users mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users > > -- > <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw >
-- Lubuntu-users mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users
