Cygwin service account (Re: inetd help)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Jul 17 14:05, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:43:17AM -0400, Igor Peshansky wrote:
> >On Mon, 17 Jul 2006, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >
> >> On Jul 17 16:49, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> > On Jul 17 10:40, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> > > Are there bad reasons for not just calling this account "root"?
> >> >
> >> > A while back I thought this is a good idea, but not anymore.
> >> >
> >> > The account is a service-starter account only.  Nothing else should be
> >> > done with this account and the installation script actually forbids
> >> > this account to be used for logon.  I don't want people to get the wrong
> >> > idea what this account is for.  I know from earlier discussions that
> >> > some people are already using the root account name as a substitute
> >> > for some Admin account, or that some people are already created a root
> >> > account on their machines.  I can easily imagine what happens next after
> >> > we occupied the root account name for the service-starter account.
> >>
> >> Having said that, the account name is still open for discussion of
> >> course.  If everybody except me thinks "root" is a good idea, so be it.
> >
> >FWIW, I'd go with "daemon" (or, as a second choice, "server").  I agree
> >with your reasoning about "root", and, IMO, "cygwin_server" is too long.
> 
> I think I'd prefer "daemon" since it has linux/unix precedent.

Sounds good to me, too.  Hopefully we won't have too many collisions with
already exising installations (that would be the definitive advantage of
a "cygwin_something" account).


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat