Johannes Poehlmann writes: > On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 12:11:08PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Perhaps we should just specify the command arguments that correctly change > > the GECOS field, but not explicity say anything about the file format > > itself; therefore, "-o" would not be valid. > > We should make a comment that the "-o" switch is non-standard and > should be awaited to do the wrong thing. > > If we want to take sides, (I do not) we agreed to stick to > the shadow suite in the SF meeting.
The -o flag is implemented and documented in the upstream shadow suite. However, I agree that unless someone comes up with some good examples of where it is used by installation/setup/maintenance scripts we should just not include it in the specification. Chris. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Support Open Source Ice-Cream
