| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
george
n00b
Joined: 12 Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm Post subject: privoxy and useradd |
 |
|
I'm trying to install privoxy to check it out and I'm having two unrelated (afaik) problems.
1. Is the package being actively maintained as 3.0.0 has been available for a while now but the latest ebuild is still 2.9.14_beta? For that matter, do packages have a lead maintainer? How is this managed?
Forget this point - I've just found https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7163
2. A privoxy user is created using "useradd" - which is fine - but...
This user is given uid 1000 even though there are no users (apart from nobody) with a uid anywhere near there. My reading of the man says that without a specified uid, useradd should take the lowest unused. However, it will go no lower than uid 1000. Why? I can't find any reason for this.
Thanks,
George.
Last edited by george on Mon Oct 07, 2002 8:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rac
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 May 2002
Posts: 6553
Location: Japanifornia
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2002 5:39 pm Post subject: Re: privoxy and useradd |
|
|
| george wrote: | | This user is given uid 1000 even though there are no users (apart from nobody) with a uid anywhere near there. My reading of the man says that without a specified uid, useradd should take the lowest unused. However, it will go no lower than uid 1000. Why? |
Because of the UID_MIN setting in /etc/login.defs.
_________________
For every higher wall, there is a taller ladder |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george
n00b
Joined: 12 Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2002 7:04 pm Post subject: Re: privoxy and useradd |
|
|
| rac wrote: | | Because of the UID_MIN setting in /etc/login.defs. |
Thanks. I've just read about login.defs and it all looked good, but ....
I changed UID_MIN to 100 and tried useradd and it still used the first free uid above 1000 so I tried:
exiting shell and su'ing again
logging out of gnome and back in again, then su'ing
rebooting 
This is a run-time option (not compile-time) isn't it? Any other ideas?
Thanks again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rac
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 May 2002
Posts: 6553
Location: Japanifornia
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2002 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Strange. I just grepped through the source for the entire shadow package, and the only relevant-looking 1000 was in the login.defs files, so I don't see anywhere it would be hard-wired in to useradd.
_________________
For every higher wall, there is a taller ladder |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george
n00b
Joined: 12 Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2002 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks again, too late to carry on tonight. I'll carry on tomorrow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george
n00b
Joined: 12 Jun 2002
Posts: 67
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2002 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
While trying again I realised how I misread the manpage - it does work. Doh!
Thanks again rac. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edcjones
n00b
Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 60
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2002 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Usually I can read Bugzilla stuff. But I have questions about https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7163 . Is there a bug in privoxy-3.0.0 or in the privoxy ebuild or is this just an announcement? When might the privoxy package be updated to 3.0.0?
Should I use the ebuild given or compile manually from the privoxy tarball? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Networking & Security
