[gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1289 bytes --]

when i first wrote enew{user,group} oh-so-long-ago, the reason for the [extra] 
arguments was the assumption that i am short sighted.  i figured someone would 
come up with some creative need for passing additional flags that i couldn't 
possibly think of.

however, in the ~9 years since, all i have to report is disappointment in the 
collective lack of creativity when it comes to abusing open ended interfaces.  
two flags have surfaced in the main tree with enewuser, and only in a handful 
of ebuilds:
	-c <comment>
	-G <groups>
enewgroup hasn't had any extra args !

when it comes to -c, the custom comment in the ebuilds isn't all that better 
than the default one that enewuser already adds, so i've punted them.

when it comes to -G, it's a matter of the existing argument not being 
correctly utilized.  enewuser already takes care of splitting the <groups> 
argument into -g/-G.  so i've converted the packages using this.

back to the point of this e-mail ... i plan on dropping the [extra] part of 
enew{user,group} and changing this to a `die`.  this simplifies the interface, 
and makes it more portable -- the darwin port has already been calling `die` 
when people pass in extra args.

now is the time to whine if you want to keep this !
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 65 bytes --]

http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 270 bytes --]

On 03.11.2011 17:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
> -mike

Less than a day is quite a short time for people to comment. Also it
would be better to include the diff in the original email.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 352 bytes --]

On Sunday 06 November 2011 13:33:48 Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 03.11.2011 17:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
> 
> Less than a day is quite a short time for people to comment. Also it
> would be better to include the diff in the original email.

4 days later and still no one cares
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] enew{user,group}: killing off [extra] argument

[Doug Goldstein]

On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sunday 06 November 2011 13:33:48 Petteri Räty wrote:
>> On 03.11.2011 17:30, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/user.eclass?r1=1.8&r2=1.9
>>
>> Less than a day is quite a short time for people to comment. Also it
>> would be better to include the diff in the original email.
>
> 4 days later and still no one cares
> -mike
>

I care Mike... I care... that the code is now cleaner and more
maintainable. Thank you for doing this improvement.

-- 
Doug Goldstein