From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zimoun Subject: bug#39023: adduser/addgroup vs useradd/groupadd Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 02:44:24 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4678e0a6a529877fee91a452424115c1@disroot.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40439) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iu54p-0000iR-QS for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:45:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iu54o-0001fn-Mb for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:45:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iu54o-0001fh-J7 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:45:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iu54o-0004jG-H8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 20:45:02 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4678e0a6a529877fee91a452424115c1@disroot.org> Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: 39023@debbugs.gnu.org, =?UTF-8?Q?G=C3=A1bor?= Boskovits Cc: symphonia@disroot.org Dear, The bug [1] reports that useradd/groupadd are not provided on BusyBox. And for example, they had this discussion [2]. [1] https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39023 [2] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2016-February/083907.html For example, on Debian, adduser is a Perl script calling useradd under the hood. And the current Guix manual says: << On a GNU/Linux system, a build user pool may be created like this (using Bash syntax and the shadow commands): >> where the parenthesis should be understood as: "adapt to your distribution". Two options: a/ explicitly notice in the parenthesis that the chunk needs to be adapted; mentioning adduser/addgroup instead of useradd/groupadd for example. b/ replace useradd/groupadd by adduser/addgroup using the corresponding options. The option b/ means that 'adduser/addgroup' is more portable (more chance to work on everywhere GNU/linux). I am not convinced. Personally, I am in favor for option a/. What do the *NIX gurus think? All the best, simon