On 3/25/07, Robert Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Using 99 works, but I think 65534 is more widely understood as the 'nobody' > ID... in that if you see a uid 65534 in a tar archive you automatically know > it once belonged to 'nobody'. A group ID of 65533 would be easy to assume as > a close relative of 'nobody', such as 'nogroup'. > > There are probably uses for this assumption, but the only one I can think of > is when unpacking binary tarballs with programs like 'kdesud' which are 'sgid > nogroup'. > > Using these large and old fashioned ID numbers is logical to me, even though > there's no technical merit to it. > > I could see ID 99 becoming understood as 'nobody', but currently I don't think > it is (in the scope of the *nix community).
On Fedora, they have both: $ grep nobody /etc/passwd nobody:x:99:99:Nobody:/:/sbin/nologin nfsnobody:x:65534:65534:Anonymous NFS User:/var/lib/nfs:/sbin/nologin $ grep nobody /etc/group nobody:x:99: nfsnobody:x:65534: -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
