On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 07:15:51AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Marc, CC'ing you�: what is your opinion about the "right" behaviour > from userdel (from deluser point of view) when a user group has an > extra member and not the user him/herself only? > > -userdel should fail and not remove the user groups > > -userdel should remove the user group but not fail, just issue a > warning
I think that basically userdel should behave as it behaves everywhere, to keep people who want (or need) to use the low-level tools are not in for any surprises. Deluser does things before calling userdel, so I think that userdel should do what has been requested as good as possible without failing. This is most likely the way that won't have the system end up in a badly inconsistent state. Greetings Marc -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834 Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
