Pádraig Brady wrote: ... >> Hi Pádraig, >> >> Thanks for forwarding that. >> >> I would like to remove su.c, if/when possible from coreutils. >> The last time I proposed that, the Hurd was mentioned as a >> reason not to, since they relied on the su from coreutils. >> >> Is that still the case, and if so, can you (the Hurd) switch >> to the one from util-linux? >> > > Well it's not clear cut to me, given that su > isn't really Linux specific.
Right, but how many non-Linux-based systems rely on coreutils' su? When this last came up, that the Hurd needed it was a deciding factor (along with Fedora/Suse, of course). > Note Fedora and Suse use su from coreutils Sure, but the point of the message you forwarded seemed to be that Fedora and Suse might soon have a good incentive to use the su from util-linux, rather than from coreutils. > while debian use their own: > http://pkg-shadow.alioth.debian.org/ > > Note also Fedora has `runuser` which is based on su: > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=blob;f=coreutils-8.7-runuser.patch;hb=HEAD > > There was also a very related request for > `runuser` like functionality to be generally available: > http://bugs.gnu.org/8700 I wouldn't mind adding such a program to the list of things coreutils installs by default. So far, no one has volunteered to do the work. > It's probably worth bringing runuser with su, > no matter where they end up.
