Dairenn Lombard wrote: > Thanks for going into such informative depth in your response. Here is the > output of our sh: > > # su --version > su (GNU sh-utils) 2.0.11 > Written by David MacKenzie. > [...] > I checked just in case for some strange reason, we got the man page for the > GNU su but were running something else in actuality.
All well and good. So often people are using a different version. Thanks for checking. However, sh-utils is rather old. It has been merged into coreutils. You might like to try the newer code. STABLE ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-5.0.tar.gz ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-5.0.tar.bz2 (coreutils is the union of fileutils, textutils, and sh-utils) BETA ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-5.0.91.tar.gz ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/coreutils/coreutils-5.0.91.tar.bz2 > Now that I think about it, yeah: if su is using the presiding authentication > method on a system (such as PAM in my case), it could be that PAM required > the 'wheel' group membership. I will read up on PAM's documentation to see > how clearly someone could make the connection that in order for PAM to allow > su-type functions, a user has to be in 'wheel'. It didn't occur to me that > su was dependant on PAM but now that I think of it, anything authenticating > with the UNIX password files would need PAM or whatever else the OS was > using. If you have contributions or patches for the documentation please suggest them. Much of the documentation needs improvement and would benefit from help. Bob _______________________________________________ Bug-sh-utils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-sh-utils
