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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns; s=
	default; b=ETR4cQ02JfONcBHcKdU/EtGGO+7Sm1/xV6+j/RRmaCFOaXcDnxEPP
	maY/XO2a0N2G/XVXv954mCjMCme0YMBPt6MuMPqtT/brBidARe1Wu2MRYwV9xAZf
	8qjWMRyROEuVTFM0khS2zmJhiaztkkzmVSVgwpqad2iU152R5oZRQw=
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:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to
	:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=default;
	bh=S+OtoJcZHEHt00Ud8R/cA0ct9DY=; b=Y4+TU5wL+KX+rrM3dcsbrzbGX8/Y
	pFvAVTA2t1G1hRSRyfsInMiy4tIbpMcXjAxdbbHFdUsMMfCqGTRZToZ1wNM8n/nm
	lTyzvX2b608cAE5i407inok9ESxOAcRtLLlMUGzmj3Eoob9zdAiYV/SzYa67I1yW
	8KJtlZgCvWYndrQ=
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=-5.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-HELO:	calimero.vinschen.de
Date:	Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:43:35 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Simplify AD integration?
Message-ID:	<20140730194335.GX25860@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20140730134716 DOT GM25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <lrbcnp$bg5$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <20140730184009 DOT GS25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <53D942F6 DOT 10402 AT redhat DOT com> <20140730192949 DOT GV25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20140730192949.GV25860@calimero.vinschen.de>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

--T/yvDUeUQRtJzDrt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Jul 30 21:29, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jul 30 13:09, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 07/30/2014 12:40 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >=20
> > >>> 2. Shall we stick to '+' as the separator char or choose another on=
e?
> > >>>    If so, which one?
> > >>
> > >> How about "@"?
> > >=20
> > > Dunno.  It *might* be a good alternative to '+'.  Personally I just
> > > dislike that a '@' is a less "light" character and it might give a wr=
ong
> > > idea.  Email:  name AT domain.  Cygwin account:  domain AT name.
> >=20
> > How bad would it be to treat the window's DOMAIN\user as cygwin
> > user AT DOMAIN?  Yes, it means string-splicing to rearrange strings when
> > converting between the two forms, rather than just single-character
> > replacement, but it might work.
>=20
> It's more or less simple from a coding perspective, slightly more
> complicated when evaluating the incoming name in a call to
> getpwnam/getgrnam.
>=20
> But I'm concerned that using this form is worse than DOMAIN AT user.  As
> you know, starting with Active Directory in Windows 2000, there are two
> variations of the domain name.
>=20
> The first is the Netbios domain name as used in pre-Windows 2000
> already.  It's called "flat name" and it consist of alphanumeric chars
> only.  The Windows expression for this type of username is
> FLATEXAMPLE\user.
>=20
> The second, more modern is the DNS-type domain name.  In this case the
> domain name is a DNS-style name like example.com.  A username in this
> style is written like a email address (trying to workaround the mailing
> list filters) user AT example DOT com.  You can use this style to login
> to your machine, for instance.
>=20
> FLATEXAMPLE and example.com are the same domain, just two different
> names for the same thing.
>=20
> LookupAccountSid and LookupAccountName return the FLATEXAMPLE domain and
> that's used in the Cygwin username.
>=20
> If you start using the FLATEXAMPLE domain in the writing style of
> the DNS-style domain, I can see a lot of confusion coming up.  This
> does in no way reflect what the users use with native Windows.
>=20
> "name @ FLATEXAMPLE?!?  Shouldn't that be name AT example DOT com?"
>=20
> OTOH, if we use the DNS-style name as username, we introduce an even
> more complex naming scheme on the commandline, with additional dots.
> I'm not sure how useful that is.

Also, chown just occured to me.  Think `chown user.group file' with the
username containing dots.


Corinna

--=20
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--T/yvDUeUQRtJzDrt
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=j18p
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--T/yvDUeUQRtJzDrt--

- Raw text -