[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple usernames for single UID

From: Budi Rahardjo
Subject: Re: Multiple usernames for single UID
Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 18:44:05 +0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Sun, May 25, 2003 at 10:20:47PM -0700, Barry deFreese wrote:
> Yes some.  Though I have to agree with Bjorn's response.  Isn't this 
> what groups and/or different levels of authority are for?  Shouldn't 
> there be one true "root" and the others be more root equivilents?   I 
> hope this doesn't come across as snide, I am merely curious.

Yes, there is only one "real" root. (eg. needed for machines that go
into single user and need fsck.) 
The others are merely "equivalents". I put quotes since the others 
(equivalents) have UID 0 too.
Having multiple admins allowed us to guard our production machines 
24 hours/day. We took turns staying up for our spoiled machines ;-)

Below us, there were other admins with lower levels of authority,
eg. web programmers, or DBA, or ... what have you.

That was the practice we used when I was working for a large entity.
Now, I work in a smaller (startup) team and continue using that
practice.  I don't know if there is better practice or if our practice
is flawed. At least that's where we use single UID with multiple usernames.
(to answer the question.)

-- budi

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]