X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:subject:from:to:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=nJ5
	h4CY4k0V9/SndRXogF4Eth6Aw9BwjAklvK5eBAuAL+Z0TnMNzZEk7ICceCtGqs4j
	d/cTxFYVXvvak0nKocVFo7A0UMioFJGoRokbDuv1gNDQ/CC67D4dZ8Lolw6tg+7p
	FyygmF4nw6iHMDQgxk1IEJa6KBygFOa+/Xk8sJ4I=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:subject:from:to:mime-version
	:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=RbBYRyyjc
	mvEgahiBTStd+ekyQM=; b=ALw3zyCKxvTHfM5wqj6KriYyQIdvMXPOs2JbNSAhG
	aGjf97YLKx6T8zs11XZS+b8gn1i7p+UivPQTvG7NIMAMQiJ6Iy+OVdHPbSc8zC2P
	3wNKg7WZBDQhmKsuhCU7F8MwhEaw+wiUBUgrDbUCxkiBRyey0DNT/JvGKw32B0Cr
	HM=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	smtp-vbr9.xs4all.nl
Message-ID:	<f27eeb214f1d28a438492cd055c30695.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl>
Date:	Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:28:05 +0100
Subject:	Re: Testers needed: New passwd/group handling in Cygwin
From:	"J.H. vd Water" <henri DOT van DOT de DOT water AT xs4all DOT nl>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	SquirrelMail/1.4.18
MIME-Version:	1.0

Hi Corinna,

>> Now that the XP bug is out of the way ... I would like come back to the change in
>> the output of 'id'.
>>
>> Obviously, everything after '545(Users),' in the output of 'id' are "well-known"
>> concepts (Windows) to you (but, not to me) ...
>
>I explained that in my mail and I already wrote
>http://cygwin.com/cygwin-ug-net/ntsec.html at one point.
[snip]

Yes, yes, yes :-) I have read all that a long time ago ...

>The group concept in Windows isn't much different from the group concept in Unix,
> except that Windows applications don't really care for the owning group of objects,
> typically.

Agreed.
[snip]

>> But as an Unix adept, I do not really care about the stuff after '545(Users),' in
>> the output of 'id', especially in case of a passwd file and a group file.
>>
>> To me the stuff after '545(Users),' is ... well, superfluous (most certainly, most
>> of the time).

>I don't know about you, but on my Linux box I get something like this:
>
>  $ id
>  uid=500(corinna) gid=11125(vinschen) groups=11125(vinschen),33(tape),
>  100(users),107(qemu),486(wireshark),1000(cvs),11126(libvirt)
>
>Most of the time I don't care about the supplementary groups after my
>primary group either, but that doesn't mean I don't want id to print
>them, nor are they unimportant.

Agreed, the supplementary groups I observe on Unix are relevant to me ... I know
that out of experience.

The difference is, that all supplementary groups show up in the /etc/group file on
my Unix box ...

However, as you know, the supplementary group to which I referred above do NOT show
up in my /etc/group file on Cygwin (they show up in SAM ... somewhere).

... and I do not care, as these groups are NOT relevant to me as a Cygwin-only user
of the Windows operating system (using passwd and group files).

Sorry, for having a different opinion on the matter.

Henri


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -