Look good. --Glenn
Bart Blanquart wrote: > On 02/20/09 06:26, Scott Rotondo wrote: >>> I originally coded it using getopt, but that fails to handle "auths >>> -ab username" correctly, as it can't tell if the "b" is the argument >>> to "-a" or a (non-existant) option. >> >> This is a significant issue. Whether or not you use getopt() in the >> implementation, the command syntax should be getopt-compliant. In >> other words, the example above should check if the user has the >> authorization called "b". The easiest way to achieve >> getopt-compliance, of course, is to use getopt(). > > On 02/19/09 23:02, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: > > No, that's unambiguous. If -a takes an argument, it _cannot_ be > > followed by other options in the same word; in "-ab", "b" is _always_ > > the argument to -a. > > Thanks for the feedback. > > I find the way getopt() does the concatenated option+argument odd > (hence why I wrote the version that was up for review to require a > space between the option and argument), but as allowing such > concatenated seems to be the expected behaviour: > > an updated webrev is now available at > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bartbl/6251549 > > and its testing output is available at > http://cr.opensolaris.org/~bartbl/6251549-testing > > > Bart > _______________________________________________ > security-discuss mailing list > security-discuss at opensolaris.org
