Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: UIDs and GIDs
Message-ID: <755@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 29 Jun 90 21:36:16 GMT
References: <743@longway.TIC.COM>
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: std-unix@uunet.uu.net
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 16
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)

From: Doug Gwyn <gwyn@smoke.brl.mil>

In article <743@longway.TIC.COM> From: mbrown@osf.org (Mark Brown)
>How does one handle (or can one handle) certain networking conventions that
>use a "dummy" user ("nobody") and require a user id of -2 ?

These are not POSIX-conforming.
NFS was determined to not be POSIX-conformant in several ways
during 1003.1 deliberations.  Our consensus was that we shouldn't
mess up UNIX standards to accommodate such clear violations of
UNIX conventions as the use of negative UIDs.

It is possible that you can get away with using UID 65534 instead
of -2.

Volume-Number: Volume 20, Number 70