bug-coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#10317: PING - bug#10317: patch to su: -l and -p should not be used t


From: Rocky Bernstein
Subject: bug#10317: PING - bug#10317: patch to su: -l and -p should not be used together
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:53:06 -0500

Attached should be a revised patch that addresses all of your suggestions.

Cheers,
   rocky

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:

> Rocky Bernstein wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> >     Rocky Bernstein wrote:
> >     > It's been a couple of months since I first sent this was sent
> without nary
> >     > an ack. Comments?
> >
> >     Hi Rocky,
> >
> >     su is barely on life support in coreutils.
> >     Meaning that it's no longer really maintained.
> >     We stopped installing it (by default) back in the 2007-2008
> >     time frame (6.9.90, 7.0).  We nearly removed it altogether.
> >
> >     Do you build/install coreutils yourself, or use it via a
> distribution?
> >     If the latter, which distribution?
> >
> > CenOS 6.2 which seems to use coreutils 8.4
> >
> >     I don't remember looking carefully at your patch before,
> >     but glanced through it just now.  Here are some suggestions
> >     if you'd like to pursue it:
> >
> >      - use "error (0, 0, ...", not fprintf (
> >      - indent with spaces, not TABs
> >      - use gnu indentation/formatting style (esp. wrt braces)
> >      - mention the change in NEWS
> >      - for a behavior change like this, we would like a test case
> >
> > The above seems all reasonable and easily doable. But are you suggesting
> is even
> > after getting this into the next coreutils, no OS is likely to use it?
> >
> > The basic idea is that a colleague and I were confused by the fact that
> -l and
> > -p conflict although this was not apparent in the documentation. I wound
> up
> > downloading the source code to understand fully.
> >
> > So something even as simple as mentioning this in doc/coreutils.texi
> would have
> > been helpful (which is the first part of that patch).
> >
> > Going further I realized that it is probably erroneous to supply both -l
> -p and
> > that can be easily warned.
> >
> > But if there is a better place such to report such problems or get code
> > improved, let me know! Thanks.
>
> I see that Fedora still uses su from coreutils, too,
> so this is a worthwhile change.
>

Attachment: su-l-vs-p.diff
Description: Text Data


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]