Re: "user/group _pflogd:_pflogd" what's with the _ ?

> pflogd from OpenBSD is built to use _pflogd as user
> (and group i thought).
> 
> Can you tell us what you mean with "our" point of
> view, are we talking 
> about a huge group? or your individual opinion
> (that's usefull for 
> seeing if many people complain or only a few).
> 
> I personally think that's nicer to have _daemonuser
> so that all daemon users are directly visible from
> output's.
> It's also a safety measure, one can have _pflogd as
> the pflogd user, and 
> pflogd as a reporting user that does cronjobs or
> something. That way the 
> access they both have is restricted. Which cannot be
> done if you have 
> users named the same (pflogd both).
> 
> Another thing that i personally think is that these
> are also understandable
> 
> _daemon => hey a daemon process that perhaps needs
> to be kicked since 
> it's suckedup all CPU (memory leak's, something
> else?)
> daemon => hey a bogus username that sucks up 99% of
> the CPU running eh 
> dnetc (for example)
> 
> But then again, it remains my personall opinion,
> again, i am PRO _daemon 
> names
hi there
when I said "our" becuase we were having a discusion
about it, here at our local university, we saw that it
saves work to mlaier and we also noticed the why of
the _. anyway a firewall is most likely to not have a
lot of users so finding conflicting user should be
pretty easy. it's no biggie anyway :)

PS: oh and sorry I wasnt following
freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org until today. and I know I
should have searched on the mailling lists db. my bad

Jorge

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias.
Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com