Unix group memberships?

simo idra at samba.org
Mon Nov 20 14:29:53 GMT 2006

On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 10:03 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> Thinking a bit more about this I come to the conclusion that
> probably this "&+@" hackery is completely obsolete now that
> we can figure out in a well-determined way what kind of
> object a name maps to. If "foo" maps to a user, then this
> user is meant, if "foo" maps to a group, then that user is
> the one. If you have the conflict case, explicitly prefix
> "unix user/group". If winbind is asked, no conflict can
> happen anyway, as Windows does not allow this kind of
> conflict. The only thing that remains is the & prefix that
> looks at NIS netgroups.
> Just one thing to note: If you mention NIS, this means NIS
> netgroups, not normal NIS /etc/group style groups. The
> latter are subsumed under "Unix groups".
> So if we agree that at some point in the future we can dump
> NIS _netgroup_ support, then we can completely dump this +@&
> hackery.

Or we could add the "netgroups" domain so that if you want to use them
you just have to specify the netgroups\group target :-)


Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer
email: idra at samba.org

More information about the samba-technical mailing list