1 |
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 10:29:28 PM Michael Weber wrote: |
2 |
> On 05/20/2012 07:22 PM, Dan Douglas wrote: |
3 |
> > I'd put money on there not being a single admin who has ever used |
4 |
> > the games group to control access to games. Games really have no |
5 |
> > business being on a system where anything like that is a |
6 |
> > requirement to begin with. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> We (students council) use pam_ldap for users and primary groups and |
9 |
> pam_group w/ /etc/security/group.conf for secondary groups like |
10 |
> video,sound,games. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> We actually considered restricting the games group to certain login |
13 |
> times (i.e. after 18 pm ) to prevent our fellow students from gaming |
14 |
> during office hours, but that just lead to long time sessions |
15 |
> over-night. Since group memberships are evaluated on session creation. |
16 |
> |
17 |
|
18 |
Yes, that's essentially what I was thinking would be the most likely |
19 |
scenario. Still, as marienz pointed out, having workstations where access to |
20 |
games is undesired, yet where they're installed nevertheless, isn't the most |
21 |
common. |
22 |
|
23 |
I'm in favor of the games group (per the second half of my last message and |
24 |
for other reasons), just not extra unnecessary installation steps that |
25 |
complicate the directory structure unless there's some real benefit to someone |
26 |
(e.g. NFS). |
27 |
-- |
28 |
Dan Douglas |