On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:28 PM, tito <farmat...@tiscali.it> wrote: > On Thursday 03 July 2014 22:38:23 you wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 8:31 PM, tito <farmat...@tiscali.it> wrote: > > > > > On Thursday 03 July 2014 14:51:11 you wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:59 PM, tito <farmat...@tiscali.it> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thursday 03 July 2014 13:03:46 Laszlo Papp wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > commit 761fd153e340a14abccc0af89f2f6617faf2077f > > > > > > > Author: Laszlo Papp <lp...@kde.org> > > > > > > > Date: Thu Jul 3 11:06:58 2014 +0100 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add optional home directory removal support to deluser > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/loginutils/deluser.c b/loginutils/deluser.c > > > > > > > index e39ac55..67b744b 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/loginutils/deluser.c > > > > > > > +++ b/loginutils/deluser.c > > > > > > > @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@ > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > //usage:#define deluser_trivial_usage > > > > > > > -//usage: "USER" > > > > > > > +//usage: "[-h] USER" > > > > > > > //usage:#define deluser_full_usage "\n\n" > > > > > > > //usage: "Delete USER from the system" > > > > > > > +//usage: "\n -h Remove the home directory" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > //usage:#define delgroup_trivial_usage > > > > > > > //usage: IF_FEATURE_DEL_USER_FROM_GROUP("[USER] > ")"GROUP" > > > > > > > @@ -35,11 +36,15 @@ int deluser_main(int argc, char **argv) > > > > > > > /* Name of shadow or gshadow file */ > > > > > > > const char *sfile; > > > > > > > /* Are we deluser or delgroup? */ > > > > > > > + struct passwd *pw = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This could probably be one line below not to distract the > comment and > > > > > > corresponding variable declaration. Although, ideally, this would > > > need to > > > > > > go to the "case 2" branch, but I did not want to introduce a new > > > block > > > > > > there with re-indenting many lines. Also, do you prefer "NULL" > > > instead of > > > > > > "0"? > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know what the preferred style is... > > > > > > > > > > > > The patch is tested with and without "-h" and it works. The > option > > > > > > selection is "-h" which reminds some people the canonical "help", > > > but on > > > > > > the contrary, this is also what is used for adduser to create the > > > home > > > > > > directory, so I picked it up for being consistent. Again, let me > know > > > > > your > > > > > > preference ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > couldn't we change -h as it conflicts with -h/--help and use -r as > in > > > > > --remove-home: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, I prefer consistency, otherwise it will become to effectively > use > > > the > > > > applets. After all, if you do not type anything, you will get the > help > > > > output, or misuse it, so why would we bloat the applet code with > that? > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > where is the bloat in doing: > > > > > > //usage:#define deluser_trivial_usage > > > -//usage: "USER" > > > +//usage: "[-r] USER" > > > //usage:#define deluser_full_usage "\n\n" > > > //usage: "Delete USER from the system" > > > +//usage: "\n -r Remove the home directory" > > > > > > > That does not make sense to me, I am afraid. It might be possible later > to > > remove other config data, too. It is probably not acceptable, thus it is > > not done so even on desktop. > > > > > > > and > > > > > > int do_delhome = 0; > > > if (getopt32(argv, "r") & 1) { ++argv; --argc; do_delhome = 1; } > > > > > > or maybe simply: > > > > > > int do_delhome = getopt32(argv, "r"): > > > argc -= optind; > > > argv += optind; > > > > > > > This looks worse than a simple increment to me, but it is such a minor > > detail that I do not think it is too relevant. > > > > -h is nice and consistent. I do not know why you would want help option > two > > when it only has one option. You would double the option number. It would > > be an overkill in this case. > > Hi, > I want not to double the number of options I just suggest to use > -r instead of -h because: >
As already replied, -r is not clear an option. I was thinking about -h and --remove-home in the beginning. I think anything else is bad choice because it is inconsistent with the rest of the world. I prefer local consistency within busybox, this I picked up -h, but if Denys would like to avoid that local consistency, I suggest --remove-home to at least have some consistency, namely with the desktop. > 1) -h is mostly used for help (with a few exceptions I am aware of). > 2) on the desktop: > a) deluser uses --remove-home ( Remove the home directory of the > user and its mailspool) > b) userdel uses -r, --remove (Files in the user's home directory > will be removed along with the > home directory > itself and the user's mail spool.) > therefore using -r would be consistent and logic to use. > That is exactly why it would be inconsistent and not logical IMHO. "-r" means remove "everything" and definitely not just home. > > > By the way, I like the bikeshed pink. ;-) > > This was just a hint to reduce codesize, > untested so I will not bet on it. > > int do_delhome = getopt32(argv, "r"): > argc -= optind; > argv += optind; > I do not see any benefit of it for one option; it also seems to make the code longer IMHO.
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox