-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
From: Greg J. Zartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Further, I think the "bypass" approach is the better one as it
> seems more
I don't think this is correct. The biggest danger I see is that the
e-smith manager would (try to) create a regular user account with the
same name as a machine account, and only be able to partially create
that account. By adding the account to the e-smith user database,
this is avoided.
> add machines accounts, but I would hate for these accounts to
> show up in the
> server manager along with user accounts (as often happens with X
They shouldn't--there's an entry in the accounts database that
identifies them as machine accounts, and I expect the user accounts
panel skips those.
So long as it can be made to work properly, which I think is now the
case with David's suggestions, it seems that there's nothing to lose
by going the e-smith way, and possibly something to gain.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4
iQA/AwUBO7PvMX6CI7gsQbX8EQIAgwCgj09PH7bcj/mbdkQUjqVRn1WvpHwAoPct
19uTPd7omSY1/5xpGUtZUeFl
=5TsJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Please report bugs to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] (only) to discuss security issues
Support for registered customers and partners to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives by mail and http://www.mail-archive.com/devinfo%40lists.e-smith.org
