You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/04 09:28:12 UTC

default user/group -- daemon/daemon versus something else (AIX uses nobody/nobody traditionally)

Hi all,

I am working on the bits and pieces to get a DESTDIR build packaged into an
installable package.
On AIX the user/group daemon/daemon does not exist. IBM packaging has
traditionally used nobody/nobody.

If I were to go nobody/nobody are there any other files besides
$sysconfdir/httpd.conf (and "original") that would need a change, and is
there a suitable
.mk file, or something similiar so that these are inserted automatically by
the make process (i.e. by the process that creates the httpd.conf and
supporting files based on the modules configured during the build)?

Or, is the project REALLY REALLY excited about the default user id always
being daemon/daemon? If so, I could just script that as a requirement for
installation. But before I choose either solution path (deviate from
project default, or historical-default for IBM packaging) I would
appreciate some feedback.

regards,
Michael

Re: default user/group -- daemon/daemon versus something else (AIX uses nobody/nobody traditionally)

Posted by Michael Felt <ma...@gmail.com>.

thanks. just need to find a way to have it happen automatically (ideally).
will go for nobody/nobody

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Or, is the project REALLY REALLY excited about the default user id always
> > being daemon/daemon? If so, I could just script that as a requirement for
> > installation. But before I choose either solution path (deviate from
> project
> > default, or historical-default for IBM packaging) I would appreciate some
> > feedback.
> >
>
> There's a comment in the default httpd.conf, I think any dedicated
> unprivileged user or nobody is probably fine.
>

Re: default user/group -- daemon/daemon versus something else (AIX uses nobody/nobody traditionally)

Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.

> Or, is the project REALLY REALLY excited about the default user id always
> being daemon/daemon? If so, I could just script that as a requirement for
> installation. But before I choose either solution path (deviate from project
> default, or historical-default for IBM packaging) I would appreciate some
> feedback.
>

There's a comment in the default httpd.conf, I think any dedicated
unprivileged user or nobody is probably fine.