Major upgrade failure

[Craig White]

On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 14:41 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> 
> Am 07.12.2011 09:29, schrieb Craig White:
> > On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 23:27 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> >> On 12/06/2011 10:50 PM, Craig White wrote:
> >>> out of curiosity, what is the requirement for having uidNumbers starting
> >>> at 500 instead of 1000?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Because I've had this system running since F8 and have three different 
> >> users right now.  Keeping the numbers the way they are is much simpler 
> >> than trying to get all three of them changed over.  You do understand 
> >> the KISS principle, don't you?
> > ----
> > You really should not be so condescending... it was uncalled for.
> > 
> > Are you suggesting that it's easier to do a kickstart just to create
> > users with specific uidNumbers rather than just 'chown joe:joe /home/joe
> > -R' ? 
> 
> YOU are suggesting that you know only your small world with
> one computer and 1-3 users where all data lives in /home/
> because you never saw environments with multiple users and
> shared data-structures you can't place in /home and if you
> work on more than one computer where one starts with 500
> and the other starts with 1000 your chown does not
> help you in any way
----
you are without question the most irritating person I have ever seen on
this list and that's quite a statement. I would prefer that you not
respond to my postings, ever.

I ALWAYS use LDAP and so my users always have the same uidNumber on
every system.

Craig


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.