a b writes: > > > You can locate the RE fairly easily:> > > > http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6387333 > That's the first thing I did. You'll note that nowehere on that page does it > state what the ETA for the fix is, which is why I asked if you could "pull > some strings" and find out if and when this will be fixed. Even an estimate > would help a lot, really.
The bug tracking tool we're using generally doesn't provide much in the way of a clue about an ETA. It doesn't provide those clues internally or externally. Bugs that are in "fix in progress" state (this one is not) will have a committed integration target, which is a build number. Of course, that can (and does) change over time. I'd be surprised if the RE has a target for this, but asking me won't get you the answer. > > Yes. And it'd be out of step with the running kernel. > Ah, so there we have it. That's the real problem behind the `chroot` > approach. So my suspicions turned out to be true after all. I don't know what those suspicions were, but having a libc that's out of step with the running kernel is toxic. > > That's a good question, and I don't have a good answer.> > You could > > possibly write an awk or shell script that does the obvious> things to > > /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow. Though that wouldn't work in> some more exotic > > situations, I think that'd be more reliable than> chroot. > I'm considering doing that. The caveat is that I might miss something, which > is why I always try to go through the commands rather than make entries > directly. In this case, I might just have to make an exception. That's a good policy, except where the underlying command is deficient. In this case, it is. > > Better still, though, is to pick up that bug and solve it. Things> always > > get done faster when the person doing the work has a strong> motivation to > > make it happen. > Option #2. Like I wrote before, this is a nontrivial problem. I have a small, > trivial fix waiting for months on end to get integrated. If I have to wait > that long for a trivial fix to get integrated, just imagine how much time > it'll take to get *three* major revisions on three commands integrated into > OpenSolaris! `useradd` and `userdel` might be easier to solve. But `passwd`, > now that's going to be hard. There are simply too many things to consider, > and I might not stand a chance. I have no idea what's going on with your other "trivial fix," so I'm afraid I can't comment on that. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
