On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 18:28, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Well, PTC. If you have a domain account, its rights are usually > administered centralized.
Not here. > Who are we to change the user rights locally > for that user? That's the responsibility of the admins. Precisely. In this context, I'm Admin (the local one). > And here's > another problem in domain environments: If the environment is using > domain policies, It isn't. Not for privileges, anyway. > you might even be out of luck to set the user rights at > all on your local machine. Even in my tiny setup at home you would be > unable to install a domain member machine and change cyg_server's rights. > Of course. It that particular scenario. But it isn't mine. Just because there are cases in which the proposed implementation will not work (and they are supposed to be that way), it's not a reason to not implement for those folks who would, but they can't, just because it's not implemented. >> Actually I'm a bit surprised with the amount of (small, tiny, >> amounting to a huge pile) problems that I've bumped into which are >> most of the time related to the fact I'm using a domain user... > > Well, sorry about that. You got what you paid for. You're not the only > domain user out there. You're expecting something which just isn't > there. The script was meant to ease the installation for local users in > the first place. In corporate or governmental environments I don't > expect the script to work OOTB. The script will almost never meet the > requirements exactly. > Ok, that's the current status. That's precisely what I was asking with all this blahblah of mine. >> [...rants deleted...] > Ok, sorry for the tone. I now think that I was putting too much expectation on the wrong features. > Again, these service installation scripts are a volunteer effort which > many users are happy with. Due to the complexity of different Windows > installations they won't work smoothly in all environments. Too bad the > script doesn't fit your needs, but, as others, I have only so much time > to work on that stuff. > Nobody is "accusing" of not working or anything... :) The objective of this mail was simply to "sense" if the current status regarding Cygwin vs domain users: 1) is expected to be that way (currently); 2) is desirable to change (in a more "compatible" way to domain users); 1) Is unquestionably answered: It is. 2) Apparently, by your argumentation, the answer is no. Nevertheless, we can close this subject for now. I will have to do something about this (for me, at least). It I found it suitable for patching Cygwin, PTC. And then it's your call. No hurt feelings or anything. >> Regarding editrights, I think that there is a problem also. >> Is the reported output in my previous email as expected? > > No. The account is missing the other rights I talked about in my first > reply. I know that is missing rights. That's wasn't my question. I'll try to rephrase: "Shouldn't the two 'editrights' commands, in the given context, give the same output?" Or, as an alternative question: "Why do the first 'editrights' command fails?" ___________ Julio Costa -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
