On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 06:22:17PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 06:13:54PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:19:10AM +0100, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > Function _require_user() does check if a user exists *and* if it is able
> > > to execute commands. Add a new function to simply check if a user exists.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <lhenriques@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > common/rc | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
> > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> > > index 154bc2dd7e94..de9ba56eefcf 100644
> > > --- a/common/rc
> > > +++ b/common/rc
> > > @@ -2289,18 +2289,27 @@ _cat_group()
> > > cat /etc/group
> > > }
> > >
> > > -# check for a user on the machine, fsgqa as default
> > > +# check if a user exists in the system
> > > +#
> > > +_require_user_exists()
> > > +{
> > > + local user=$1
> > > + _cat_passwd | grep -q $user
> > > + [ "$?" == "0" ] || _notrun "$user user not defined."
> >
> > As _require_user() does "su $qa_user" after the "grep", so it really make sure
> > there's an "user". But if the _require_user_exists() only trys to grep /etc/passed
> > to make sure there's an "$user", I'd like to make the "grep" condition be more exact.
> > For example, if there's an user "myuser100" in the /etc/passwd, then _require_user_exists
> > "myuser" or "user100" or "user1" or "user10" all return 0.
> >
> > So how about:
> > _cat_passwd | grep -qw $user
> >
> > Or more exact:
> > _cat_passwd | cut -d: -f1 | grep -qw $user
> >
> > Or other better command line:)
>
> Oh, the "-w" doesn't work with an user with "_", likes myuser_123. So
> how about:
>
> _cat_passwd | grep -q ^$user:
Yep, that seems to make sense. I'll prepare v3 and send it out soon.
Cheers,
--
Luís
