From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1566 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Design for extensible passwd[/shadow?] db support Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:28:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20120813192833.GY27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20120812053802.GA10971@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120812205643.GT27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120813135048.GX27715@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1344886062 3567 80.91.229.3 (13 Aug 2012 19:27:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 19:27:42 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1567-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Aug 13 21:27:43 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T10Ib-0001RM-MO for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 21:27:37 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 18387 invoked by uid 550); 13 Aug 2012 19:27:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 18379 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2012 19:27:36 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1566 Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:22:07PM +0200, Arvid E. Picciani wrote: > On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:50:48 -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > >Well that's up to the Austin Group, not you. We implement POSIX. > > fair enough. Now that i think of it, pulling out getpwent might not > be such a smart idea after all, considered that projects would need > musl specific build instructions then. Indeed. Of course, one possible course of action would be not to support anything but flat files like we do now, and require a library replacing getpw* that admins would have to link to get other lookup methods. But I think it we can do it in ~50 lines of clean code inside libc, that's a lot better (and it avoids the issue of having to worry about whether the static binary you're passing around supports different lookup methods). > >Making /bin/ls depend on dynamic loading modules is a bit > >disgusting... > > huh? yeah exactly my point. Why does /bin/ls load the passwd stuff > in the first place? > It really shouldn't be in libc :/ It reads it because ls -l prints the owners of files, and seeing a username rather than a number is a lot more informative. Being able to identify the owner of files by name rather than just as a number seems like an important core system functionality to me... Rich