From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MyTVU-0003wM-S1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:48:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EA741E0767; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from foo.birdnet.se (foo.birdnet.se [213.88.146.6]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7DA89E0767 for ; Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 14100 invoked by uid 501); 15 Oct 2009 16:48:50 -0000 Message-ID: <20091015164850.14099.qmail@stuge.se> Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 18:48:50 +0200 From: Peter Stuge To: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Too many problems with groupadd when creating stage3 Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org References: <20091015150745.25784.qmail@stuge.se> <200910151242.21514.vapier@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200910151242.21514.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: b746f800-0105-4777-8a86-a9d4f8a0024a X-Archives-Hash: efaabe5d4f3d83866da9845dc080b396 --zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > I'm having problems again with groupadd, > >=20 > > Maybe it's a problem with eutils.eclass? If it's inherited then it's > > fair to expect that all it's functions will work. How to solve this > > for user database changes that want to call programs in shadow? >=20 > there is no problem with eutils.eclass Because it is not intended to function for stage2? Or because it is intended to assume that groupadd and friends are available? But where is the problem? One idea is to provide another implementation of these commands than the one in shadow. If that's a good idea, then where should that implementation go? //Peter --zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFK11JyhR3Q0dhIfEgRArveAKDTkb94NQB4pGogwqtEWfQ0JlswxACfa2hi WMfRy+G5I/VthvwGy1D8vME= =Nd9t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --zYM0uCDKw75PZbzx--