Re: meaning of absent --users prameters.

[Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs@gmail.com>]

Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>> Hello. Currently authentication system works as following:
>>>
>>> menuentry "name" --users "a,b,c" {
>>> }
>>> Means that only superusers and users "a", "b" and "c" are permitted to
>>> boot this menuentry. To allow only superusers to boot an entry one would
>>> need:
>>> menuentry "name" --users "" {
>>> }
>>> And absence of --users means "anyone can choose this entry".
>>> Unfortunately this is error-prone. Does anyone oppose to change it to:
>>> No --users: only superusers
>>> To have an unlocked entry you have to add --unlocked
>> First, what is the definition of a 'superuser'?  Where does GRUB get
>> the information to make a decision.
>>
> Superusers are set on per-configuration basis with
> set superusers=<list>
> these users are allowed to invoke shell and edit menu entries so there
> is no reason to restrict which entries they are allowed to boot.
>> In any case, I'd recommend
>>
>>   --users: superusers only
>>
>> or even
>>
>>   --users: superusers
> I don't get what you mean

I thought you were asking about a parameter to the menuentry command

   menuentry "name" --users "a,b,c" {

I was recommending

   menuentry "name" --users superusers {

Where superusers is a keyword implying all superusers.

   -- Bruce