On Saturday 07 February 2015 16:45:34 you wrote: > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:03 PM, tito <farmat...@tiscali.it> wrote: > > On Thursday 05 February 2015 19:48:47 Laszlo Papp wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Denys Vlasenko <vda.li...@googlemail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> wrote: > >> >> I think it is bad idea to only allow this operation when long options > >> >> are enabled. Long options and this functionality are two separate > >> >> things in my book. > >> > > >> > > >> > "Standard" deluser has only long options. > >> > > >> > Incompatibility is not a good thing. > >> > >> Sure, but busybox has short option in other cases for such operation, > >> so you need incompatibility somewhere anyway. > >> > >> In addition, the long option is not the problem. The problem is that > >> the functionality is switched off by switching the long option off, > >> rather than the actual functionality. Therefore, busybox does not > >> remain as fine-tunable as possible. Which is why I said it was a bad > >> idea in my opinion. I would like to be able to customize busybox to > >> only include things what I want. Currently, if I do not want long > >> options, but I do want this small feature, I have to get everything. > >> This is against the minimal project principles. > >> > > Hi, > > i would dare to suggest to use: > > > > -r for --remove-home > > > > and reserve > > > > -R for --remove-all-files (if we ever implement it). > > > > this would reduce incompatibility to a mininum. > > Incompatibility is bad. And this "bad" of it tends to bite some years after. > > It doesn't seem like a big deal when a developer of a system decides > to use "deluser -r" and save, you know, whole 2687 bytes in busybox binary > which otherwise would be there because of "CONFIG_LONG_OPTS=y" > for standard form, namely, "deluser --remove-home" to work. > > Then years someone else will spend many hours upon customer reports > why "delete user" operation in someone's modem stopped working. > After much decoding of web code and scripts, they will discover that > it's because someone smart decided to use non-standard "deluser -r" > to save tiny, tiny 2.7kb of flash/RAM. (In my test, it's less than 1/300th > of busybox binary size). > > I can imagine their reaction. >
Hi, i see your point, but I recall we did this before in bb's code to keep some options that originally had only long options working even without long options enabled. Still i feel that the actual solution is not optimal, a more formally correct one should be: add a CONFIG_DELUSER_DELHOME make it turn on CONFiG_LONG_OPTS and add a line to the help text of CONFIG_DELUSER_DELHOME to explain it. But you are the boss. Ciao, Tito _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
