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:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=BhIdMTg8R6de4vnu B/iF4m2FURZFPdautqQDdzwCaYKTxOGr7flw0wOzs6mu47AOIarDjAzYyxona1sK t7CgN6eaBzR7pDmIMu+hSXTNMAxMFbnW76fqrz44j6XQIw1ERbUCEHfOyYDEjPrc 4sQBsCEIHNf5jtDFWUVI/0I4kDw= 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:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=/bj1e21FOjr04qTnohqgEC oRYYA=; b=RE8+FUFQIvJwgJhFdy3ji0J46WMlWiOkbu3K9yLlGX5txqg5V5lJUb Vzsygs+t19zURqMrjPy6TpCS48uLdnPJ4IMhy8PnG4VKK+wC2aw2kBlvcS4qGesE ABpS7s0ZoL1b34lBVBEosu3446p66BSkKZ6KbjrAGHCoSSC+Cuxfs= 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=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: vms173025pub.verizon.net Message-id: <53D9270B.3010007@cygwin.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:10:35 -0400 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Simplify AD integration? References: <20140730134716 DOT GM25860 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> In-reply-to: <20140730134716.GM25860@calimero.vinschen.de> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit On 07/30/2014 09:47 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > Hi folks, > > > here's a set of question to those of you interested in the new > passwd/group functionality. This already has been discussed partially, > but there was no conclusion. > > Right now, there's a lot of variability in the user names, based on the > /etc/nsswitch.conf settings db_prefix and db_separator. > > The separator char is a '+' by default but can be replaced with other > ASCII chars. db_prefix allows three styles of user naming conventions: > > Default is 'auto': > > builtin accounts; "+SYSTEM", "+LOCAL", etc. > primary domain "corinna", "cgf", ... > other domain: "DOMAIN1+walter", "DOMAIN2+mathilda" > > If set to 'primary': > > builtin accounts; "+SYSTEM", "+LOCAL", etc. > primary domain "MYDOMAIN+corinna", "MYDOMAIN+cgf", ... > other domain: "DOMAIN1+walter", "DOMAIN2+mathilda" > > If set to 'always': > > builtin accounts; "NT AUTHORITY+SYSTEM", "BULTIN+LOCAL", etc. > primary domain "MYDOMAIN+corinna", "MYDOMAIN+cgf", ... > other domain: "DOMAIN1+walter", "DOMAIN2+mathilda" > > "Primary domain" here is either the primary domain of the machine or the > local SAM if the machine is no domain member. "Other domain" here is > either a trusted domain or the local SAM for domain machines. > > Together with the variable separator char this is an awful lot of > variability, which has the potential side effect to complicate the > code *and* debugging. > > Also, the leading '+' for builtin accounts results in some downsides, > one of them for instance the fact that `chown +x' assumes that x is a > numerical uid or gid. Thus `chown +SYSTEM ...' fails. On the other > hand it simplifies the account handling inside of Cygwin. > > So I'd like to ask a few questions to which I'd like to have some brief > answers, kind of like a poll, to get a better idea how we should > proceed: > > 1. Shall we remove the leading '+' from the builtin account names > or shall we keep it? I'd say remove it since it isn't providing a clear benefit and, more importantly, causes regressions in some cases with existing tools (as you stated above with chown). > 2. Shall we stick to '+' as the separator char or choose another one? > If so, which one? Did the discussion of this before end up inconclusive? I thought that '+' was seen as preferable for some reason that received some overall approval. > 3. Shall we keep the `db_prefix' variability or choose one of > the prefixing methods and stick to it? If so, which one, auto, > primary, or always? My opinion is that options are only necessary when there's no clear single solution. If it's very clear that there is no way to merge all these possibilities into 1 or one is not clearly a superset of the others, then we need to keep the options. We shouldn't keep the options just to have options obviously. :-) > Bonus question: > > 4. Should Cygwin downcase all usernames when generating the Cygwin > username, so, if your Windows username is 'Ralph', your Cygwin > username will be 'ralph'? This is enticing since it's a more common convention for UNIX/Linux environments, which Cygwin strives to mimic. But I would say that downcasing isn't desirable since it just upholds a convention. The convention isn't a requirement so it shouldn't be enforced. -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- 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