From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Mar 25 12:19:41 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gray.impulse.net (gray.impulse.net [207.154.64.174]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1004237B405 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:19:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from gray.impulse.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gray.impulse.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78CB7375E7; Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:19:34 -0800 (PST) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG From: Ted Cabeen Subject: Re: Open bug reports with no action? In-Reply-To: <200203230107.g2N17u864828@apollo.backplane.com> References: <200203230107.g2N17u864828@apollo.backplane.com> <20020322225901.E39C9375E7@gray.impulse.net> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:19:34 -0800 Message-Id: <20020325201934.78CB7375E7@gray.impulse.net> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In message <200203230107.g2N17u864828@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon wri tes: >:I submitted a bug report (PR# bin/31933) in November that's never been looked >:at. I even enclosed a patch that fixes the bug. Is there anything that I can >:do to get the bug looked at sooner rather than later? > > Sure. Hmm. I'm not sure I like the idea of using -- instead of -n. > It led to some confusion when I was reading the patch. The user should never use '--'. The code just assigns the initial username or uid to the '--' argument so that it is associated with an argument. I wanted an argument that wouldn't be accidentially tried by the user thus causing inconsistencies if they used both the '--' argument and a leading username or uid on the command line. Also, using the '--' allowed me to preserve almost all of the current code and make the change simpler. Would it help if there were some additional clarifying comments in the code? > What if we officially assigned an actual option letter like 'U' instead > of '-'? Another alternative would be to have a global ExactUser global > that defaults to 0 and gets set to 1 if either -n or -u are explicitly > specified. Those would work, but we might have problems we people using both an initial username/uid and a -U argument in the first solution. See the following sample command line: "pw userdel 10012 -U bob". What do you do in this situation if there's a user named "10012" and no user with uid 10012? Which user do you delete? What about if there is a user with uid 10012 but it's not bob? The current code is pretty clean WRT problems like this, and I wanted to make the patch as simple as possible. - -- Ted Cabeen http://www.pobox.com/~secabeen ted@impulse.net Check Website or Keyserver for PGP/GPG Key BA0349D2 secabeen@pobox.com "I have taken all knowledge to be my province." -F. Bacon secabeen@cabeen.org "Human kind cannot bear very much reality."-T.S.Eliot cabeen@netcom.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (OpenBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 iD8DBQE8n4ZWoayJfLoDSdIRAj6jAKCRrJfsvIL+j8DlpLk/hPG7bBLjPQCbB8+z PGYs3qEayp8B3OGcqhswoyM= =3xuo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message