Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 17:57:22 -0700 From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ab.ca> To: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Marcin Cieslak <saper@system.pl>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, FreeBSD current users <FreeBSD-current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: What is user uucp good for? Message-ID: <200211070057.gA70vMYc044944@orthanc.ab.ca> In-Reply-To: Message from Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.ORG> of "Thu, 07 Nov 2002 08:37:48 %2B1030." <20021107083747.B592@firefly.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> Maybe future generations will wonder what it is named after >> similarly to GCOS field in passwd today :-) > >At the very least we should change the shell. But Kris' suggestions >sound the best. I agree. But more importantly, let's make sure that we don't, by removing the uucp login, make it difficult for people to continue to run programs that need dialer access. If we remove uucp from the password file we need to ensure that UUCP, installed from the ports tree, will continue to work with the new device ownerships and permissions. In theory Taylor UUCP will work with only 'dialer' group access to the tty* and cua* devices, but this does need to be verified before nuking the uucp password file entry. OTOH, I don't see a pressing need to nuke the uucp login. Nothing breaks by leaving it in place, and third-party code assumes it exists (things that want to mess with modems, like FAX software). It makes more sense to (perhaps) mention 'uucp' is a deprecated login, but until *BSD defines an "official" interface to the dialer devices, it would be premature to remove the existing de-facto interface to them (think /var/spool/lock, and uu_lock(3)). --lyndon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200211070057.gA70vMYc044944>