nobody user id and group id different from the dlink one about alt-f

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I agree, for compatibility reasons.

I can change the uid without problems, as in Alt-F real users id start at 1000, 
but real group id start at 100, so 501 is a problem.

Shall we made happy new or existing Alt-F users?
Alt-F is still beta, so I'm inclined to made the changes.

Original comment by [email protected] on 16 Sep 2011 at 4:01

• Changed state: Accepted

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I think it's not a pain to change IDs. We have to manage upgrades, so we can 
create upgrades scripts, that in this specific case do once the first boot 
after upgrade:
 find /wherever_the_mounts_are. -uid 99 -exec chown nobody {} ';'
 find /wherever_the_mounts_are. -gid 99 -exec chown :nogroup {} ';'

We have to take care of problems in the "find" and "chown" commands of busybox.

I think that a planning for the upgrade process is a must do ...

Regarding teh changes, we have to decide what Alt-F is. 
It is a "I am the master of NASs, and I own your data because I'm the best" 
thing or "I am the best and I will give you a transition from a stock firmware 
painless" thing ?
;)

Cheers,
Gabriele

Original comment by [email protected] on 16 Sep 2011 at 4:20

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I changed my mind.

If we change nobody uid/gid for compatibility reasons, why not to keep also 
users uid/gid? Where to stop?

A wiki or a fix script could be provided to easy the transition.

Original comment by [email protected] on 15 Oct 2011 at 5:46

• Changed state: WontFix