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: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , 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: Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 14:28:05 +0100 Subject: Re: Testers needed: New passwd/group handling in Cygwin From: "J.H. vd Water" To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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