Hi,
Christian Perrier a écrit :
Quoting Jérémie:
Hi,
Mathias Gug a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 10:50:01PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
A first concern comes with the dedicated group name. Should we use
"smbshare" and then still advertise that obsolete acronym (SMB) which
is however known by nearly everybody?
Does this really have to be hardcoded ?
If we create the system group in the package's postinst, yes. We have
to choose a group name.
Another proposal is to use a group named fileshare, that could be used
to define a list of users that are allowed to define shared directories
on the network (via samba, nfs, ftp or any other protocol).
+1
That'd needs some discussion on -devel first, then.
AFAIC, this sounds as a reasonable default, as far as it stays
customizable on a per file service basis
My 2 €cts
JT
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
