[ale] User Private Group -- what are the benefits?

[leam hall]

I think it used to be "users" but as people lost sight of using groups
well the solo group was implemented so they must choose to share vice
being able to by definition.

Leam

On 6/4/12, James Sumners <james.sumners at gmail.com> wrote:
> In almost every Linux distribution I have used, Arch Linux being the
> only exception I can think of off the top of my head, when a new user
> added, then a group of the same name is created as that user's primary
> group (if one isn't specified). I've always just accepted this as "the
> way it's done," and never researched it. We've recently moved from
> Solaris to RHEL as the OS for our database server. Our DBA has
> inquired about why user's have their own group on the RHEL system when
> they did not on the Solaris system. I don't have an answer other than
> "that's just the way it is" and I don't like that.
>
> I've been doing some searching for documentation on this, but haven't
> been able to find anything. So, do any of you guys have some insights
> as to why this is (typically) done on Linux systems?
>
> --
> James Sumners
> http://james.roomfullofmirrors.com/
>
> "All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts
> pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it
> is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become
> drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted."
>
> Missionaria Protectiva, Text QIV (decto)
> CH:D 59
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>


-- 
Mind on a Mission <http://leamhall.blogspot.com/>