Subject: Re: [netatalk-admins] Feature Suggestion: AFP/TCP running as user, not root
From: Eugene Cohen (eugene@cegt201.bradley.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 14 1997 - 09:59:28 EST
At 6:10 PM -0600 11/13/97, Aaron Gowatch wrote:
>But honestly, this is a rather silly idea. Its a lot like saying "I dont
>want named running as root on my system, so everytime I need to lookup a
>name, I'll have the TCP stack rsh to my configured DNS host, startup
>named, I'll perform my query, have the TCP stack rsh my DNS host again and
>shutdown named. I'll do this everytime I want to perform a DNS lookup,
>and it will be better".
>
>Even if you *could* get it to work, the overhead saved is so minimal, its
>not even worth the effort to try to make it work, not to mention how slow
>it would be. For instance, if 10 users we're logged into your Netatalk
>box, there would be ~11 afpd processes. With the "rsh n' start"
>mechanism, there would be 10, only the process which runs as root would be
>missing.
I didn't think it was a silly idea. I don't want to run the daemon to
server all the users of the system, I just want to bring it up OCCASIONALLY
when I want to mount the server on *my* Mac with *my* account's permissions
and nothing more. I am a user of the system, and do not have root access,
but the sysadmins don't have the time or knowhow to install netatalk, and
they would not mind if I ran it myself (if it was possible - this is what
we're dicussing) occasionally. It isn't fair to compare what I am
proposing to be used with named. That's not the purpose of what I'm
saying. I don't want to save CPU necessarily, I just want non-root users
to be able to run it. You dig?
-Eugene
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:28:04 EST