Felipe Kellermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. I see your code isn't applied directly to savannah's repository.
savannah is currently a bit out of sync. I'll try to get this fixed.
There is no other public repository.
>Why the Standards doesn't specify exactly the return codes, at least
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 3:47am -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Felipe Kellermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > $ id fuu
> > uid=1018(fuu) gid=199 groups=199
> > $ echo $?
> > 1
> >
> > That return code sounds strange to me given the question I did.
>
> I agree. To fix things, I installed the patch e
Felipe Kellermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> $ id fuu
> uid=1018(fuu) gid=199 groups=199
> $ echo $?
> 1
>
> That return code sounds strange to me given the question I did.
I agree. To fix things, I installed the patch enclosed below.
Thanks for reporting this.
> with my version I have the f
Hi,
While writing patches to an embedded (BusyBox) version of `id' I noticed
an interesting question about the `return value' that coreutils is using
when we have an invalid group (say, an inexistent primary group) for the
specified or current user. Reading the XCU I noticed it doesn't specify