Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 00:17:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Bradley Dunn <bradley@dunn.org> To: David Nugent <davidn@unique.usn.blaze.net.au> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: longer usernames Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970423235310.11216A-100000@ns2.harborcom.net> In-Reply-To: <19970413103855.23362@usn.blaze.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, David Nugent wrote: > And cvs log entries. There were a few other subtle changes that > have leaked through since. > > FWIW, FreeBSD-current supports *15* character login names, not > 16. In addition to the headers, there was a problem with the > 'proc' struct in the kernel (setlogin(), I think) and a few > userland changes involved as well where the size was assumed > to be 8. Would it be possible for someone to commit the changes where a length of 8 was assumed to 2.2? It shouldn't make any visible difference as long as people keep the headers the same, right? It would just make it easier for people to enable the long names if we didn't have to worry about finding all the places where we have to replace 8 with MAXLOGNAME or UT_NAMESIZE or whatever. Maybe even in the header files: #ifdef LONG_USERNAMES #define UT_NAMESIZE 16 #else #define UT_NAMESIZE 8 #endif etc... Pretty please? :) Just think, then answering all of these questions would be so much easier. :) pbd -- Why can't you be a non-conformist like everyone else?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970423235310.11216A-100000>