From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0A79138359 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 15:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BDF79E0937; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 15:08:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FF9CE0931 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 15:08:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by martineau.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 802681C55386D; Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:08:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:08:16 -0400 From: "Aaron W. Swenson" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New acct-user/pgbouncer Message-ID: <20201005150816.GB20055@martineau.home.grandmasfridge.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20201005145157.GA20055@martineau.home.grandmasfridge.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="xXmbgvnjoT4axfJE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201005145157.GA20055@martineau.home.grandmasfridge.org> X-Archives-Salt: ed5829a4-643a-428e-8859-32c5b498ee76 X-Archives-Hash: 5def8f1b72f7b37b63870d2cb62d2857 --xXmbgvnjoT4axfJE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2020-10-05 10:51, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > Currently we're just using -1 for pgbouncer. The user does own a couple t= hings, > but that's managed by checkpath in the init script. >=20 > So, given that any UID will do, I'm proposing either 383 (I think someon= e else > is asking for 384) or 463. >=20 > Pgbouncer only needs a UID. It uses the postgres GID. >=20 > Which UID should we use: 383 or 463? And, I'm seeing my list was slightly out of date as 383 is now taken. So, w= hich UID should we use: 379 or 463? --xXmbgvnjoT4axfJE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQE1BAAWCgDdFiEEBAujrfkChUViF3zk/5dcDSiUpdEFAl97NuBfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDA0 MEJBM0FERjkwMjg1NDU2MjE3N0NFNEZGOTc1QzBEMjg5NEE1RDFfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDA0 MEJBM0FERjkwMjg1NDU2MjE3N0NFNEZGOTc1QzBEMjg5NEE1RDEACgkQ/5dcDSiU pdGmaQEAxWW9jqdi4D1VKspnQmW/mjDKq/G7qSIQ8LuUmEaoR2IBAKjywYAOBQ/3 MYm2Z3vjtJTJD6EYTylSEIg4qiu161oE =ipYZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xXmbgvnjoT4axfJE--