rra at stanford.edu
Tue Aug 20 21:48:14 UTC 2002
Jeffrey M Vinocur <jeff at litech.org> writes:
> Ok, essentially done (not tested yet, though). One question on desired
> semantics: if the -g flag is given, but group name can't be determined,
> what should we do? I see three possibilities:
> - die (logging an error message)
> - return just the username, as if -g hadn't been given
> - return "user@" with nothing after the @
I vote for die and log; having the user not have a group name sounds like
a real error that should be fixed.
(The harder problem is when the user is in a bunch of supplemental groups;
I'm not sure what to do about that, but at least for a first cut we can
just return the user's primary group.)
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
<http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.
More information about the inn-workers