Date: Sat, 7 Dec 1996 19:09:07 +0100 (MET) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org (FreeBSD-current users) Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/include utmp.h Message-ID: <199612071809.TAA21282@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.961207185802.674A-100000@nagual.ru> from "[?KOI8-R?]" at "Dec 7, 96 07:00:24 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As [?KOI8-R?] wrote: > > Alternatively, we could teach last(1) to handle both cases, based on > > some heuristics. (Haven't tried, but i assume that's also possible.) > > Oh please no! It is more easy to say "cp /dev/null /var/log/utmp" > once than bloat each and every program (last, w, who, finger, etc.) > with code which handle obsolete case. You've missed my point. Recreating utmp is out of the question, and is already performed at the next reboot. The problem is _wtmp_. Requiring people to throw it away will upset quite a lot of them (including me). In particular users like ISPs certainly will beat at us if they don't have a migration path to track previous logins. (I think sax.de maintains wtmp files for at least one year back. More `serious' ISPs will probably archive them even longer.) (The same applies to /var/log/lastlog, i assume.) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612071809.TAA21282>