Trying to understand some users and groups that continue to exist on BSD
systems.
Can someone please point me to references or share examples of historical
and/or recent uses of the following users and groups?
Also any clarifications of my understandings below would be appreciated.
(My context is BSD. I know some of these may have different old and
existing uses on other systems.)
daemon user
I see /var/msgs on NetBSD is owned by daemon. msgs will abort if doing -c
(cleanup) if not root or daemon user. I guess that is historic. I don't
see any daemon user usage.
operator user
I understand that historically, the operator user had logins
for those doing disk backups (via its login group privileges).
I understand the operator group, just wondering if any recent uses of
operator user.
bin user
Don't know what uses it.
daemon group
I understand that historically, these are for processes needing less
privileges than the wheel group. Also historically, programs using
/var/spool directories were setgid daemon. Anything common other than
LPD/LPR still use the daemon group?
sys group
I understand that historically, the sys group was used for access to the
kernel (/sys?) sources. (I don't know if that was just read or was for
writing too.) Anyone still use "sys" group? (I guess this is like wsrc
which sometimes I manually setup and use for writing to src directories.)
bin group
I understand that historically, used as the group for system binaries, but
commonly the wheel group is used instead. Some third-party software, like
OpenOffice.org, install files owned by the bin group.
staff group
How would this differ from wheel or operators?
Any recent systems actually have default use of this?
guest group
Any recent systems actually have default use of this?
nobody group versus nogroup group
What is the significance of having both of these groups?
Thanks!
My knowledge comes from my early days at Sun in 84-85 as a rock-n-roll roadie
turned into a UNIX sysadmin. It was passed to me as I was learning how to
take care of trade show Sun Workstations. So take it with a grain of salt.
> daemon user
daemon was for daemon processes that ran in the background but did not want to
run as root. I believe it was used by inetd when it spawned a process but an
not sure. It was also used by sendmail when it gave up its SUID root privileges.
> operator user
operator was a normal user that had privilege to read the raw file systems
through group membership. Sysadmins who did backups would also be a member of
this group. The group I recall in the early days was "kmem" although now
there is a separate group "disk".
> bin user
A user to go with group bin. Typically would be the "proper" owner of all the
binaries and libraries on a system. It has lingered on for far to long
because, IMHO, the vendors had no clue as to why everything was owned by bin
and just kept it that way since "thats the way it's always been".
> bin group
I was told that group bin came from UCB to allow semi-trusted staff to replace
binaries in the file system without giving them the root password.
> staff group
My recollection is that staff was for group read/write permissions for home
directories, separate from group wheel which granted extra privileges
> nobody group versus nogroup group
The nobody group was a group to go with the nobody user introduced with NFS.
nogroup may have been someone's attempt to make the name more obvious, or it
may have been for non-privileged account. But the second case weakens the
protection of a non-privileged account
I was poking around an HP UX system at work today, and noticed a
command I've never noticed before ... /usr/bin/bs.
I'm sure it's been there for a long time, even though I've been an
HPUX admin for more than a decade, sometimes I'm just blind ... but
anyway ....
I tried to search on google ... it looks like only HPUX, AIX, and
Maybe AU/X has it. Seems to be some kind of pseudo BASIC like
interpreter.
Anyone ever use it for anything? Has anyone even noticed it before?
I'll have to boot my Crimson to see if IRIX has it.
- Derrik
Derrik Walker v2.0, RHCE
lorddoomicus(a)mac.com
http://www.doomd.net
"There's nothing nice about Steve Jobs and there's nothing evil about
Bill Gates."
-- Chuck Peddle, MOS 6502 Chip Designer
A note to all 2.11bsd users:
Over the past 2 years several bug fixes for 2.11BSD accumulated, and over
xmas break I finally found the time to communicate them to Steven Schultz.
Steven was so kind to package them into two new patch files
446 issued December 27, 2008
447 issued December 31, 2008
Together, the patches address the following points
- ulrem.s: the unsigned long modulo operator (%) was broken in libkern
- umount: returned inverted exit codes (1 for success, 0 for failure)
- tar: core dumped when a whole /usr tree was archived
- tcsh: the time buildin function printed some erroneous or zero statistics
- ps: core dumped when '-t' option was used with no further argument
- apropos: core dumped when 2 or more arguments were given
- vmstat: wrong normalization for some fields
- several issues around the rk disk driver
- no rk root attach function
- no rk BOOTDEV support
- incorrect UCB_METER code (vmstat/iostat never showed any rk activity)
- autoconfig left the RK11 controller in an error state
- pstat: added additional options to access more kernel data structures
- new -c option, dumping the coremap
- new -m option, dumping the ub_map (UNIBUS map)
- new -b option, dumping the buffer pool table
- change -s output, gives now full table dump
- adapt the info's displayed by -T
- some documentation corrections (vmstat, pstat, tcsh)
Note: In case you wonder, as I did, why 211BSD survived 20 years with a
broken unsigned long % operator:
- only the non-FPP libkern implementation was affected
- the kernel simply doesn't have any unsigned long modulo's :)
- apparently only standalone mkfs after patch 434 was compromised
For the full story of all the above consult the header of the patch files.
The patch files are available from moe.2bsd.com and ftp.wx.gd-ais.com.
Note, that Steven changed the packaging some time ago, the patches are
now packed in bzip'ed tarballs in groups of ten patches. So you'll have
to look into
ftp://moe.2bsd.com/pub/2.11BSD/440-447.tar.bz2ftp://ftp.wx.gd-ais.com/pub/2.11BSD/440-447.tar.bz2
With best regards,
Walter Mueller
http://osxbook.com/software/ancientfs/
Amit Singh has added support for a whole bunch of early UNIX filesystem and
archive formats to FUSE.
Cheers,
Warren
John Cowan:
"Cannot yet" is good. Is there any hope of seeing the 10th Edition
emerge from the shadows, ever?
=======
Unless some energetic person skilled at nudging people in
a friendly way takes on the cause, probably not.
Even were Novell to release the source code to System V,
that wouldn't of itself make 10/e open, since there's plenty
in the latter system that differs substantially from the
former--all the really interesting bits, in fact. As has
been discussed here at some point in the past, someone would
have to get (updated list of players) Novell, AT&T, and Alcatel
all to agree to the release. The good news is that that would
probably mostly require getting Novell to agree that there's
nothing in the system worth protecting for commercial reasons,
and the others just to officially say what is already likely
true, that they don't care. The bad news is that that is
probably substantial work, as he who talked what was then SCO
into a hobbyist-source-license for 7/e and predecessors knows well.
But Warren has already gone far beyond the call in his work
(and cannot be thanked enough, so herewith I thank him yet
again); and I'm old and tired and was never really good at
talking to corporate types anyway; and in my humble but correct
opinion, it is the combination of energy and dedication and
ability to talk cheerfully to corporate times and to persist
without losing either hope or patience or cordiality that
is needed. That has always been a rare combination.
If someone thinks he or she has the requisite skills and wants
to have a go, I'll be glad to offer what little help I can,
and I'm sure Warren likewise. But somehow I wonder whether
it will actually happen before the world ends on 2038 January
18.
Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
John Cowan:
> Does this depend heavily on OS X, or should it work on Linux and BSD as well?
Warren Krun Toomey:
No idea. I had a brief look at some of the code on the web site and it seems
relatively neutral, but I have not downloaded it yet. I've sent an e-mail
with the same question to Amit.
======
I keep meaning to poke about at FUSE, since it plays more or
less the role of the file-server-implementation library setup
I wrote for my own purposes 20 years ago (in the context of a
UNIX variant that cannot yet be distributed freely).
But I'd be surprised if the stuff was terribly MacOS X dependent.
Certainly FUSE exists in Linux, and the libraries and requisite
kernel module are even included in some Linux distributions
(notably recent editions of Fedora), because sshfs is built atop
FUSE.
Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
Bit of digging:
> 1. "bs" was written at AT&T, probably at the Labs, at some time between
> the release of 32V and System III. It was part of both System III and
> at least some System V releases.
And of course it is in TUHS! Remember we have 32V and SIII. For example,
look into
TUHS/Other/Distributions/Plexis_Sys3/
or
TUHS/PDP-11/Distributions/usdl/SysIII/
The sources contain 'bs' under cmd/bs
The latter one (under USDL) contains also the man page under usr/src/man/man1
(as 'bs.1').
So, there. You have it.
This leads me to consider we would greatly benefit from an expanded and
indexed TUHS repository tree. I made one on my mirror long ago, but a
series of disk crashes ended with it. Maybe, if there is interest I
could do it again.
j
--
EMBnet/CNB
Scientific Computing Service
Solving all your computer needs for Scientific
Research.
http://bioportal.cnb.csic.eshttp://www.es.embnet.org
Dear all,
(This has got to be the strangest cross-post I've ever done.)
I have just taken a bet from a friend to challenge my geekiness. I was
telling him about my love of Vintage Technology and he proposed that I
combine two hitherto separate hobbies and see what happens. The
topics: the DEC PDP-11 minicomputer (vintage: 1970s) and vacuum-tube
ham radios (vintage: 1960s). I do sincerely apologize for
cross-posting, but I am rather younger than either of these
technologies (vintage: 1984) and this seems like a monumental
challenge.
My question for y'all: how could I possibly design+build a project
that uses both of these technologies? My thought is to port some radio
receiver Digital Signal Processing (DSP) application into PDP-11
assembler, compile and run it via emulator on my PC, then use it with
the vacuum-tube regenerative receiver that I built a few years ago...
Does anybody know if PDP-11 UNIXes even had the capability for a
"sound card"? Or, to get ambitious, I would LOVE to design some
interface circuitry between PDP-11 digital circuitry and vacuum-tube
electronics... The challenges are legion: the tube side of the circuit
operates around 350V DC levels with radio-frequency (RF) signals at 7
MHz (almost the clock rate of some PDP-11s!) and I don't have the DEC
Handbooks, but I'm pretty sure that even those ancient pre-TTL
circuits operate below 350V!
So... any, er, "ideas"?
Best regards,
Ross Tucker