Sean Reifschneider added the comment:
A few comments on this one:
Perhaps the tests should be patched instead of the grp module? Because
it may be useful for someone to know that old-style NIS maps are being
referenced.
I presume if the change is made in grp that it should also be made in pwd?
Shouldn't the patch do a "continue" instead of a break? I believe the
"+" entry means "include the contents of the NIS map here (I don't
believe it can be used for LDAP), and as far as I know does not HAVE to
be included at the end of the file.
We probably don't care, but just to be canonical it seems that there are
also "+name" and "-name" entries in /etc/group and /etc/passwd. "+name"
in an entry is the same as a "name" entry, but the additional fields are
read from NIS. "-name" means that "name" is not a valid user (in other
words, don't let "name" login, even if they exist in NIS). I can't
imagine we want to implement those though, because...
Note that the "+" syntax is the old syntax from before nsswitch was
introduced. As far as I know, + syntax was deprecated back in 1995 when
nsswitch.conf was added.
In conclusion, I think the tests that the tests that annoy Anthony
should be fixed, but I'm not convinced the behavior of grp should be
changed. Particularly without a corresponding change in pwd.
Thoughts?
See the following URL for more information about the +/- syntax:
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?nsswitch.conf+4
----------
nosy: +jafo
____________________________________
Tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue775964>
____________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/list-python-bugs%40lists.gossamer-threads.com
A few comments on this one:
Perhaps the tests should be patched instead of the grp module? Because
it may be useful for someone to know that old-style NIS maps are being
referenced.
I presume if the change is made in grp that it should also be made in pwd?
Shouldn't the patch do a "continue" instead of a break? I believe the
"+" entry means "include the contents of the NIS map here (I don't
believe it can be used for LDAP), and as far as I know does not HAVE to
be included at the end of the file.
We probably don't care, but just to be canonical it seems that there are
also "+name" and "-name" entries in /etc/group and /etc/passwd. "+name"
in an entry is the same as a "name" entry, but the additional fields are
read from NIS. "-name" means that "name" is not a valid user (in other
words, don't let "name" login, even if they exist in NIS). I can't
imagine we want to implement those though, because...
Note that the "+" syntax is the old syntax from before nsswitch was
introduced. As far as I know, + syntax was deprecated back in 1995 when
nsswitch.conf was added.
In conclusion, I think the tests that the tests that annoy Anthony
should be fixed, but I'm not convinced the behavior of grp should be
changed. Particularly without a corresponding change in pwd.
Thoughts?
See the following URL for more information about the +/- syntax:
http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?nsswitch.conf+4
----------
nosy: +jafo
____________________________________
Tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue775964>
____________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/list-python-bugs%40lists.gossamer-threads.com