On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 03:43:46PM -0700, Xin Li wrote: > On 06/03/15 14:58, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 12:51:46AM +0300, Sergey Kandaurov wrote: > >> On 3 June 2015 at 23:48, Baptiste Daroussin <b...@freebsd.org> > >> wrote: > >>> Author: bapt Date: Wed Jun 3 20:48:28 2015 New Revision: > >>> 283969 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/283969 > >>> > >>> Log: Add a pw_mkdb2(3) function which does the same thing as > >>> pw_mkdb(3) except it takes a new argument allowing to specify > >>> the endianness of the database to generate > >>> > >> > >> Why not change pw_mkdb()? Is it used outside of the project? > >> > > Because that would change the ABI of libutil and it is not a > > private library aka we are supposed to maintain ABI compatibility > > as we do not know if it is used or not externally to the project. I > > care about the ABI because I have made this change in order to use > > it in pw(8) and MFC it to stable/10 before 10.2. > > > > libutil is not versionned so this is the only way to not break the > > ABI. Except if someone has a better idea than I do. > > Looking at r113596, pwd_mkdb(8) was changed to generate both legacy > (version 3, endianness sensitive) and new (version 4, machine > independent) formats. > > Now, after 12 years, is it still sensible to generate legacy format db > entries? Maybe we should just disable the generation by default and > eventually remove the ability to generate them? >
That could be an option, in this case we could add a -l (legacy) option to pwd_mkdb to allow the users to generate the db in legacy format and drop support support for legacy format in all other tools. Meaning I can revert pw_mkdb2(3) If noone raised a voice against disable the generation by default, I'll do it in a couple of days. Best regards, Bapt
pgp05BZapD8Uc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
