Bug#265593: marked as done (debian-policy: LOGNAME vs. USER)
Your message dated Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:34:57 -0500
with message-id <878yby1xke.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
and subject line Bug#265593: debian-policy: LOGNAME vs. USER
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Aug 2004 21:01:22 +0000
>From jidanni@jidanni.org Fri Aug 13 14:01:22 2004
Return-path: <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Received: from smtp2.apol.com.tw [203.79.224.63]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1BvjAw-00004r-00; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 14:01:22 -0700
Received: from jidanni1 (TC218-187-79-209.2-4.dynamic.apol.com.tw [218.187.79.209])
by smtp2.apol.com.tw (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA26408177
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 05:01:14 +0800 (CST)
Received: from jidanni by jidanni1 with local (Exim 4.34)
id 1Bviby-0005Ym-1A; Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:25:14 +0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: debian-policy: LOGNAME vs. USER
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.63
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:25:13 +0800
Message-Id: <[🔎] E1Bviby-0005Ym-1A@jidanni1>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.6.1.1
Severity: wishlist
One cannot find a statement about if shell scripts can expect to find
$LOGNAME or $USER set or none or both.
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 265593-done) by bugs.debian.org; 29 Aug 2004 02:36:19 +0000
>From srivasta@debian.org Sat Aug 28 19:36:19 2004
Return-path: <srivasta@debian.org>
Received: from host-12-107-230-171.dtccom.net (glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com) [12.107.230.171]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1C1FYH-0003Dt-00; Sat, 28 Aug 2004 19:36:17 -0700
Received: from glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com (srivasta@localhost [127.0.0.1])
by glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Debian-10) with ESMTP id i7T2Ywnl021050
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:34:58 -0500
Received: (from srivasta@localhost)
by glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Debian-10) id i7T2YwsS021049;
Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:34:58 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com: srivasta set sender to srivasta@debian.org using -f
To: Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
Cc: 265593-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#265593: debian-policy: LOGNAME vs. USER
References: <[🔎] E1Bviby-0005Ym-1A@jidanni1>
From: Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org>
Organization: The Debian Project
X-URL: http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux)
(i686-pc-linux-gnu)
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
X-Face: #q.#]5@vq!Jz+E0t_/;Y^gTjR\T^"B'fbeuVGiyKrvbfKJl!^e|e:iu(kJ6c|QYB57LP*|t
&YlP~HF/=h:GA6o6W@I#deQL-%#.6]!z:6Cj0kd#4]>*D,|0djf'CVlXkI,>aV4\}?d_KEqsN{Nnt7
78"OsbQ["56/!nisvyB/uA5Q.{)gm6?q.j71ww.>b9b]-sG8zNt%KkIa>xWg&1VcjZk[hBQ>]j~`Wq
Xl,y1a!(>6`UM{~'X[Y_,Bv+}=L\SS*mA8=s;!=O`ja|@PEzb&i0}Qp,`Z\:6:OmRi*
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2004 21:34:57 -0500
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] E1Bviby-0005Ym-1A@jidanni1> (Dan Jacobson's message of "Sat,
14
Aug 2004 04:25:13 +0800")
Message-ID: <878yby1xke.fsf@glaurung.internal.golden-gryphon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: 265593-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_10,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Hi,
On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 04:25:13 +0800, Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> said:
> Package: debian-policy Version: 3.6.1.1 Severity: wishlist
> One cannot find a statement about if shell scripts can expect to
> find $LOGNAME or $USER set or none or both.
It is unwise for the script to assume that either shall be
found; POSIX makes no such guarantees. The definition of the shell
command interpreter mentions HOME and PATH (but not USER or
LOGNAME).
LOGNAME is not required to be present, but, if it is,
the system shall initialize this variable at the time of login to be
the user's login name. See <pwd.h>. For a value of LOGNAME to be
portable across implementations of IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, the value
should be composed of characters from the portable filename character
set.
However, the script may not be run from a login shell, so you
can't rely on that. Even the script logname (provided by an essential
package) can't always get you a login name -- and even that is only
present if /usr is mounted.
Why is this a policy issue? Seems to me that this is shell
scripting 101.
manoj
--
Don't look now, but there is a multi-legged creature on your shoulder.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: