Does `a "group" option and adding a "group" option' a meaningless repeatition?

[Regid Ichira]

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 08:04:17 PM GMT+3, Andreas Metzler <ametzler at bebt.de> wrote:

> On 2023-09-10 RL via Pkg-exim4-users <pkg-exim4-users-wVTzQnVv9Y8Rm1jG9FmulZdwIE86Xf0q at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > Andreas Metzler <ametzler-4wVjbtCF2hw at public.gmane.org> writes:
>
> > > On 2023-09-10 Regid Ichira via Pkg-exim4-users <pkg-exim4-users-wVTzQnVv9Y8Rm1jG9FmulZdwIE86Xf0q at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > >> Quoting /usr/share/doc/exim4-base/README.Debian.gz :
[...]
> > > A group needs to be defined but it can be done explicitely (group=) or
> > > implicitely by setting user= and using the primary group of the user.
>
> > I think this would be just as clear to the reader if the README.Debian
> > file said something like "You can do this by setting a "user" and, if a
> > different group is required, a "group" option."
>
> That seems to imply that the user has a primary group of the same name.
> Which is not necessarily the case.
>

What about:

If any of your aliases expand to pipes or files or directories you
should set up a user= option for these deliveries to run under.
It is suggested to also set a group explicitly, with the group= option, in
order to avoid the side effects of a user= option, without a group= option.
Note user= and/or group= settings in the transport override those setting
in a router.

?

> cu Andreas
>
> --
> `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
> so grateful to you.'
> `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'