non-superuser chown(2)s considered harmful

[John Chambers]

In article <1991Jan7.145146.7589 at gjetor.geac.COM>, adeboer at gjetor.geac.COM (Anthony DeBoer) writes:
> Awhile back in this thread we were discussing what to do about files in users'
> directories that they didn't own; I advocated rm'ing them during nightly
> cleanup and got lightly flamed and somebody else said it would be better to
> chown them to the user.  

Well, frankly, if I ever discover such a "cleanup" script, I'll drop what
I'm doing, go super-user, and eliminate the little monster.

Way back when I first stumbled across Unix, one of my first reactions was
"Wow, a system that actually lets users share files and work together!"
Now people come along and suggest that this is a bad idea, and that users
who have the gall to engage in cooperation and sharing of their work are
to be punished by silently removing their shared files or by jumbling the
ownership so you can't tell who was responsible for what.  

Really marvelous.  But I guess it's to be expected in a society whose
school system's general term for cooperation is "cheating".  

And we wonder why the USA is becoming a third-rate industrial power.

-- 
All opinions Copyright (c) 1991 by John Chambers.  Inquire for licensing at:
Home: 1-617-484-6393 
Work: 1-508-486-5475
Uucp: ...!{bu.edu,harvard.edu,ima.com,eddie.mit.edu,ora.com}!minya!jc