Default value for UIDs

[jhell]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 06:30:23PM +0100, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 28 June 2011 17:59, Dan Nelson <dnelson at allantgroup.com> wrote:
> > In the last episode (Jun 28), Chris Rees said:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> [crees at zeus]~% tail -n 2 /usr/ports/UIDs
> >> dbxml:*:949:949::0:0:dbXML user:/nonexistent:/sbin/nologin
> >> nobody:*:65534:65534::0:0:Unprivileged user:/nonexistent:/usr/sbin/nologin
> >> [crees at zeus]~% grep crees /etc/passwd
> >> crees:*:1001:1001:Chris Rees:/home/crees:/bin/tcsh
> >> chris:*:1001:1001:Chris Rees:/home/crees:/bin/tcsh
> >> [crees at zeus]~%
> >>
> >> I'm a little concerned at how close the ports UIDs are getting to the
> >> username space...
> >
> > There are only 216 entries in UIDs, though, so if people are just using
> > "last entry + 1" when adding new ones, they should probably start filling
> > the gaps instead.  The 100s and 200s are pretty dense, but 350-399 only has
> > 5 entries, 400-499 has 4, 600-699 has 7, 700-799 has 3, etc.
> >
> 
> Thank you for pointing that out (d'oh).
> 
> However, perhaps we could still address the *potential* problems. To
> use one example, Debian has (as long as I can remember) used 10001 for
> the first username. When we have 65535 - 99 UIDs to play with,
> expansion like this isn't a problem.
> 
> Could it be worth it? Think of ten years down the line.
> 

Best part would be to find every port that doesnt need a statically
allocated UID/GID and just dynamically allocate them after a certain
range '30000-50000' or whatever for ~20,000 ports and divide that
namespace up by category.


dbxml really does it really need to be static ? it just needs to run.

Also: (stable/8) /usr/ports/UIDs
dbxml:*:945:945::0:0:& user:/nonexistent:/sbin/nologin
dbxml:*:949:949::0:0:dbXML user:/nonexistent:/sbin/nologin

Which one of these are we planning on actually using here ?

git, hg, undernet, vboxusers... for example.