Re: Question about /etc/group
- From: "Serge Dubrouski" <sergeyfd@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:00:25 -0600
I think it's just a legacy. Old UNIXes required that you put users
into all groups that they belong to, no matter primary or secondary.
On 7/27/07, David Tonhofer <redhatter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hello,
I have a simle detail question:
Sometimes users are registered as being secondary members of the group
that is their primary group - why is that so?
For example:
User "uucp" has as primary group the group with gid 14:
uucp:x:10:14:uucp:/var/spool/uucp:/sbin/nologin
And group 14 is group "uucp". However, the user is also listed as being
a secondary member of that group:
uucp:x:14:uucp
Which is pretty pointless. Or not?
Best regards,
-- David
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
--
Serge Dubrouski.
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
- References:
- Question about /etc/group
- From: David Tonhofer
- Question about /etc/group
- Prev by Date: Question about /etc/group
- Next by Date: Why OOM is killing my processes?
- Previous by thread: Question about /etc/group
- Next by thread: Why OOM is killing my processes?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
- Re: Users and Groups
... The only way I can ever use Com1 is to be root or belong to the uucp
... (Fedora) - Question about /etc/group
... I have a simle detail question: ... Sometimes users are registered as being
secondary members of the group that is their primary group - why is that so? ...
And group 14 is group "uucp". ... (RedHat)