Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Re: cpio - segmentation violation
Keywords: cpio, negative UID
Message-ID: <1839@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 27 Jun 89 19:45:26 GMT
References: <1120@servax0.essex.ac.uk> <10406@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Reply-To: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 12

>That NFS-induced modification to the concept of UID has caused numerous
>problems.

There's nothing about NFS that requires that "nobody" be a negative UID;
I suspect future SunOS releases, and the NFS source releases derived
from them, will follow 4.xBSD and S5 and have unsigned UIDs with
"nobody" becoming 65534 or something like that.

>The whole issue of NFS ID mapping has been a real mess.

Separate issue(s): 1) RFS-style mapping has, I think, been implemented
by Cray, and 2) RFS also has, I think, the same notion of a "nobody" UID.