The Unix Heritage Society mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: reed@reedmedia.net (Jeremy C. Reed)
Subject: [TUHS] historical users and groups
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:59:40 -0600 (CST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.0901131824440.26223@tx.reedmedia.net> (raw)

Trying to understand some users and groups that continue to exist on BSD 
systems.

Can someone please point me to references or share examples of historical 
and/or recent uses of the following users and groups?

Also any clarifications of my understandings below would be appreciated.

(My context is BSD. I know some of these may have different old and 
existing uses on other systems.)

daemon user
I see /var/msgs on NetBSD is owned by daemon. msgs will abort if doing -c 
(cleanup) if not root or daemon user. I guess that is historic. I don't 
see any daemon user usage.

operator user
I understand that historically, the operator user had logins 
for those doing disk backups (via its login group privileges).
I understand the operator group, just wondering if any recent uses of 
operator user.

bin user
Don't know what uses it.

daemon group
I understand that historically, these are for processes needing less 
privileges than the wheel group. Also historically, programs using 
/var/spool directories were setgid daemon. Anything common other than 
LPD/LPR still use the daemon group?

sys group
I understand that historically, the sys group was used for access to the 
kernel (/sys?) sources. (I don't know if that was just read or was for 
writing too.) Anyone still use "sys" group? (I guess this is like wsrc 
which sometimes I manually setup and use for writing to src directories.)

bin group
I understand that historically, used as the group for system binaries, but 
commonly the wheel group is used instead. Some third-party software, like 
OpenOffice.org, install files owned by the bin group.

staff group
How would this differ from wheel or operators?
Any recent systems actually have default use of this?

guest group
Any recent systems actually have default use of this?

nobody group versus nogroup group
What is the significance of having both of these groups?


Thanks!



             reply	other threads:[~2009-01-14  0:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-14  0:59 Jeremy C. Reed [this message]
2009-01-14 13:00 ` Jose R. Valverde
2009-01-15 17:15   ` Jason Stevens
2009-01-16  5:52     ` Angus Robinson
2009-01-14 13:33 ` Jose R. Valverde
2009-01-14 17:15 ` Tim Bradshaw
2009-01-14 17:36   ` John Cowan
     [not found] <mailman.1.1231898401.13466.tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
2009-01-14  7:28 ` Robert Harker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.NEB.4.64.0901131824440.26223@tx.reedmedia.net \
    --to=reed@reedmedia.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).