Danek Duvall wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 09:18:49AM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > > >> Darren Moffat wrote: >> >>> Shawn Walker wrote: >>> >>>> I was looking for a confident way to ensure "up-front" that a user has >>>> the necessary privileges without relying on the (incorrect) >>>> sledgehammer approach of requiring root. >>>> >>> There isn't one and not even checking for uid=0 is correct. >>> > > So while I understand all that, I'd like a bit of clarification on two > points. > > First, as I understand it, it's good form for a GUI to disable (grey out or > whatever) operations which are inappropriate or impossible at any given > time, such as installing a package onto an image where you don't have > sufficient permissions to complete the operation successfully. > > - Is this not actually the good form I think it is? > Not in this case. When a button/menu item is disabled, the user will ask "why". If the answer is pretty obvious, e.g. "Bold" is disabled when an image is selected, it is pretty obvious since "Bold" is not a resonable command to perform on an image. However in the case you question, The command "install" is reasonable for the selection, a selected package. It is not at all obvious to the user that "install" is disabled for security reasons. In these cases the best approach is to leave the command (button, menu item) enabled and display an error dialog if the command is invoked. This informs the user of the problem and can suggest a corrective action.
Frank _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
