On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 11:09 +0000, Will McDonald wrote: > On 06/01/06, Johnny Hughes <mailing-lists at hughesjr.com> wrote: > > I disagree ... not that it matters what I think. If chown and chgrp > > allow dots to seperate user and group, I don't think they should not be > > allowed in user names (or at least this should be a major factor to > > consider). > > "I don't think they should not be allowed", is that double negative > intentional? :) Accident ... I don't think they should be allowed :) > > I think '.' as a separator for chown etc. is a GNU thing. I seem to > remember Solaris only accepts ':'. > right ... if this was solaris, dots would be ok :) but ... I still think dots should not be used. I can see the benefit too though. > http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/cgi-bin/man?chown+1 > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20060106/14d40817/attachment-0004.sig>