This patch was sent to the mailing list two weeks ago without further comment from the maintainer...
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:28 PM, tito <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thursday 03 July 2014 22:38:23 you wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:31 PM, tito <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > On Thursday 03 July 2014 14:51:11 you wrote: >> > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:59 PM, tito <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > On Thursday 03 July 2014 13:03:46 Laszlo Papp wrote: >> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > commit 761fd153e340a14abccc0af89f2f6617faf2077f >> > > > > > > Author: Laszlo Papp <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > Date: Thu Jul 3 11:06:58 2014 +0100 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Add optional home directory removal support to deluser >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > diff --git a/loginutils/deluser.c b/loginutils/deluser.c >> > > > > > > index e39ac55..67b744b 100644 >> > > > > > > --- a/loginutils/deluser.c >> > > > > > > +++ b/loginutils/deluser.c >> > > > > > > @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@ >> > > > > > > */ >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > //usage:#define deluser_trivial_usage >> > > > > > > -//usage: "USER" >> > > > > > > +//usage: "[-h] USER" >> > > > > > > //usage:#define deluser_full_usage "\n\n" >> > > > > > > //usage: "Delete USER from the system" >> > > > > > > +//usage: "\n -h Remove the home directory" >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > //usage:#define delgroup_trivial_usage >> > > > > > > //usage: IF_FEATURE_DEL_USER_FROM_GROUP("[USER] >> ")"GROUP" >> > > > > > > @@ -35,11 +36,15 @@ int deluser_main(int argc, char **argv) >> > > > > > > /* Name of shadow or gshadow file */ >> > > > > > > const char *sfile; >> > > > > > > /* Are we deluser or delgroup? */ >> > > > > > > + struct passwd *pw = 0; >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > This could probably be one line below not to distract the >> comment and >> > > > > > corresponding variable declaration. Although, ideally, this >> would >> > > need to >> > > > > > go to the "case 2" branch, but I did not want to introduce a new >> > > block >> > > > > > there with re-indenting many lines. Also, do you prefer "NULL" >> > > instead of >> > > > > > "0"? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Let me know what the preferred style is... >> > > > > > >> > > > > > The patch is tested with and without "-h" and it works. The >> option >> > > > > > selection is "-h" which reminds some people the canonical >> "help", >> > > but on >> > > > > > the contrary, this is also what is used for adduser to create >> the >> > > home >> > > > > > directory, so I picked it up for being consistent. Again, let >> me know >> > > > > your >> > > > > > preference ... >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi, >> > > > > couldn't we change -h as it conflicts with -h/--help and use -r >> as in >> > > > > --remove-home: >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > Well, I prefer consistency, otherwise it will become to effectively >> use >> > > the >> > > > applets. After all, if you do not type anything, you will get the >> help >> > > > output, or misuse it, so why would we bloat the applet code with >> that? >> > > > >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > where is the bloat in doing: >> > > >> > > //usage:#define deluser_trivial_usage >> > > -//usage: "USER" >> > > +//usage: "[-r] USER" >> > > //usage:#define deluser_full_usage "\n\n" >> > > //usage: "Delete USER from the system" >> > > +//usage: "\n -r Remove the home directory" >> > > >> > >> > That does not make sense to me, I am afraid. It might be possible later >> to >> > remove other config data, too. It is probably not acceptable, thus it is >> > not done so even on desktop. >> > >> > >> > > and >> > > >> > > int do_delhome = 0; >> > > if (getopt32(argv, "r") & 1) { ++argv; --argc; do_delhome = 1; } >> > > >> > > or maybe simply: >> > > >> > > int do_delhome = getopt32(argv, "r"): >> > > argc -= optind; >> > > argv += optind; >> > > >> > >> > This looks worse than a simple increment to me, but it is such a minor >> > detail that I do not think it is too relevant. >> > >> > -h is nice and consistent. I do not know why you would want help option >> two >> > when it only has one option. You would double the option number. It >> would >> > be an overkill in this case. >> >> Hi, >> I want not to double the number of options I just suggest to use >> -r instead of -h because: >> > > As already replied, -r is not clear an option. I was thinking about -h and > --remove-home in the beginning. I think anything else is bad choice because > it is inconsistent with the rest of the world. I prefer local consistency > within busybox, this I picked up -h, but if Denys would like to avoid that > local consistency, I suggest --remove-home to at least have some > consistency, namely with the desktop. > > >> 1) -h is mostly used for help (with a few exceptions I am aware of). >> 2) on the desktop: >> a) deluser uses --remove-home ( Remove the home directory of the >> user and its mailspool) >> b) userdel uses -r, --remove (Files in the user's home directory >> will be removed along with the >> home directory >> itself and the user's mail spool.) >> therefore using -r would be consistent and logic to use. >> > > That is exactly why it would be inconsistent and not logical IMHO. "-r" > means remove "everything" and definitely not just home. > > >> >> > By the way, I like the bikeshed pink. ;-) >> >> This was just a hint to reduce codesize, >> untested so I will not bet on it. >> >> int do_delhome = getopt32(argv, "r"): >> argc -= optind; >> argv += optind; >> > > I do not see any benefit of it for one option; it also seems to make the > code longer IMHO. >
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
