Wyllys Ingersoll wrote:
> Template Version: @(#)sac_nextcase %I% %G% SMI
> This information is Copyright 2009 Sun Microsystems
> 1. Introduction
>     1.1. Project/Component Working Name:
>        non-interactive destroy for kdb5_util
>     1.2. Name of Document Author/Supplier:
>        Author:  Mark Phalan
>     1.3  Date of This Document:
>       20 January, 2009
> 4. Technical Description
> 
> Project: Non-interactive destroy for kdb5_util
> Submitter: Mark Phalan
> Binding: Patch
> 
> ABSTRACT
> --------
> 
> This proposal adds support for an option to kdb5_util(1M) which allows a
> Kerberos policy and principal database to be destroyed without an
> interactive prompt for confirmation and adds a new global option to
> specify a stash file. This is useful when scripting kdb5_util(1M). After
> the changes outlined below are made kdb5_util will have better
> command-line compatibility with MIT Kerberos' kdb5_util.
> 
> 
> BACKGROUND
> ----------
> 
> MIT's kdb5_util uses the "-f" option for the "destroy" sub-command to
> indicate that the Kerberos policy and principal database should be
> destroyed without user interaction. It uses the "-sf" option as a global
> option to specify a stash file.  Solaris's kdb5_util has no way to
> specify that the database should be destroyed non-interactively and uses
> the "-f" option as a global option to specify a stash-file (-sf is also
> implemented but not documented).
> Both the functionality provided by the option to non-interactively
> destroy a Kerberos database and the compatibility with MIT Kerberos are
> important for Solaris Kerberos.
> 
> 
> PROPOSAL
> --------
> 
>  - New global CLI argument to indicate stash file - "-sf".
>  - Change current meaning of "-f" to indicate non-interactive
>    destroy.
> 
> 
> Patch binding is requested to allow these options to be backported to
> S10. However there are no current plans to do so at this time.

You have an interface change that I don't believe is backwards 
compatible yet you are requesting patch binding.  Please justify why 
this change in meaning for 'destroy -f' will be acceptable and won't 
cause problems.

>  SYNOPSIS
> -     /usr/sbin/kdb5_util  [-d dbname] [-f stashfile_name]
> +     /usr/sbin/kdb5_util  [-d dbname] [-sf stashfile_name]
>           [-k mkeytype] [-m ] [-M mkeyname] [-P password] [-r realm]
>           [-x db_args]... cmd

I very very very stronly disagree with this synopsis change.

The use of a two letter option name is not acceptable and is against the 
CLIP guidelines.

However if this is what MIT Kerberos uses and kdb5_util is otherwise 
compatible CLI syntax with the MIT version then I grudgingly hold my 
nose and let this go.  However please communicate to the upstream 
community that a single dash with multiple option letters after it is 
undesireable as it is confusing to many users, eg is '-sf' one option or 
is it equivalent to '-s -f'.

--
Darren J Moffat

Reply via email to