Re: User groups

2003-02-02 Thread Michael Schwendt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 1 Feb 2003 13:33:13 -0800 (PST), Jay Crews wrote: > Listman writes > > > > When I create a new user, by default the user belongs to a group of > > the same name. Why is this? It seems to me that having a group for > > every single > >

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Dennis Gilmore
On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 13:10, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 11:53 02 Feb 2003, Dennis Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It would be nice to not > | > have to remember to hack your umask when switching to/from group work -- Psyche-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/m

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 11:53 02 Feb 2003, Dennis Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | | > The advantage of the per-user matching group is that it makes group | > collaboration very easy. When you work with others, sharing files, you | > often have a shared area (the "project" directory at my workplace) where | > the

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Dennis Gilmore
> The advantage of the per-user matching group is that it makes group > collaboration very easy. When you work with others, sharing files, you > often have a shared area (the "project" directory at my workplace) where > the files are group owned by a group for the project and the setgid bit > is o

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 15:13 01 Feb 2003, Listman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | When I create a new user, by default the user belongs to a group of the same | name. Why is this? It seems to me that having a group for every single | user is overkill. Id like to have all users belong to a 'users' group and | then more

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Matthew Saltzman
On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Listman wrote: > When I create a new user, by default the user belongs to a group of the same > name. Why is this? It seems to me that having a group for every single > user is overkill. Id like to have all users belong to a 'users' group and > then more priviledged users be

RE: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Listman
eassurance. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jay Crews Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 3:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: User groups Listman writes > > When I create a new user, by default the user belongs to a grou

Re: User groups

2003-02-01 Thread Jay Crews
Listman writes > > When I create a new user, by default the user belongs to a group of the same > name. Why is this? It seems to me that having a group for every single It's for securty, and yes it probably is a little overkill. > user is overkill. Id like to have all users belong to a 'u