Hey Chris, The issue is indeed caused by the mentioned commit ac0147f, however the change is necessary for proper functioning of su(1). Nevertheless, I have created a PR that separates the short option strings used for su(1) and runuser(1) as we need a different scanning mode for the former.
I have also added regression tests for runuser(1) and slightly improved the one for su(1) so we can catch regressions earlier. With the patch the issue with runuser should be fixed. Can you please validate this ? PR: https://github.com/util-linux/util-linux/pull/4185 Edit: After taking a closer look at the runuser(1) man page it seems to me that the actual documented syntax implies that options should always be put before the username and potential arguments that are to be passed to the shell or defined command. This aligns with the usage of su(1) and seems more coherent. Let's see what Karel thinks about this :D Regards, Christian Goeschel Ndjomouo
