Peter Bunclark wrote:
> >
> > Not really. Furthermore, "+" doesn't tell you what kind of "+" are you
> > talking about (yp? nisplus?)
> You wouldn't be both a nis and a nisplus client; you might look in
> nsswitch.conf to find out which nameservice to refer to.
> >
Yuck. No way. That would involve mucking with yet another API which
may or may not be there. I'm sorry, there is stuff that's just messy
and then there is stuff which is just too broken to contemplate. This
falls in the latter category.
>
> > Yes it is. It's just how it is done which is idiotic. The autofs
> > "multi" maps allows you to specify any number of maps to be searched in
> > any order, without putting crud into the maps themselves.
>
> That sounds great; but for us, the issue is, we'd use vastly more Linux
> systems if they'd sit happily in a Solaris NIS+ cluster, and currently,
> it takes a lot of hacking to get close to that state. A Sun-compatible
> autofs would be a huge step in the right direction.
>
I have to say, given the fact we're talking about host-local files, I'm
really not too horrendously sympathetic.
-hpa
