Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
tags 47467 wontfix thanks (Alexander last comment did not make it yet to the mailing list...it seems that Alioth mailing lists are incredibly slow these days) Soo http://bugs.debian.org/46467 for the very last comment by Alexander. >From this last comment, my conclusion is that, for a feature that is perfectly dealt with appropriate NIS database utilities, we're imagining a complete redesign of NSS functions in the glibc. IMHO, this is completely overkill and I have actually no time nor motivation, as shadow maintainer, to deal with this. Hence marking the bug as wontfix. Please use the NIS utilities to modify NIS-related information. Anyone wanting to deal with this bug, please reassign it to glibc and manage to talk with glibc maintainers to explain the issue. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
> > I don't want to know about the details, I just want to know whether > > this should still be our problem about the proper PAMification of chsh > > and chfn. > > No, this is NSS/libc guys' problem in first place, then > ours (with Tomasz). Well, now it's time to deal with this. >From the above, I understand that this bug should be reassigned to "passwd,glibc". So, we need to describe to the glibc maintainers what we are talking about. Can you please summarize this? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
> > I don't want to know about the details, I just want to know whether > > this should still be our problem about the proper PAMification of chsh > > and chfn. > > No, this is NSS/libc guys' problem in first place, then > ours (with Tomasz). Well, now it's time to deal with this. >From the above, I understand that this bug should be reassigned to "passwd,glibc". So, we need to describe to the glibc maintainers what we are talking about. Can you please summarize this? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
Hi! On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 07:26:02AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > Quoting Alexander Gattin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): ... > > I can confirm that PAM auth works fine now, but as for > > changing anything on NIS server, it's IMHO impossible > > with current libc (I may be wrong) -- for this there > > are yppasswd, ypchsh and ypchfn tools... > > Well, the bug log seems to say the contraryas long as chsh and > chfn are properly PAMified, they should be able to act on NIS. No, this is wrong. Perhaps there are relevant changes in libc which I'm unaware of, but chsh.c and chfn.c do not contain any unusual libc code that looks able to update fullname/shell (using NSS). > This already seems to be possible for passwd. Well, this should work with passwd, not through NSS but through PAM. I think this works somewhere, but not on my system -- I get PAM_AUTHINFO_UNAVAIL. When I enable "nis" parameter to pam_unix, I get prompted for NIS root password, but then anyway receive PAM_AUTHINFO_UNAVAIL. > I don't want to know about the details, I just want to know whether > this should still be our problem about the proper PAMification of chsh > and chfn. No, this is NSS/libc guys' problem in first place, then ours (with Tomasz). -- WBR, xrgtn -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
Quoting Alexander Gattin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Hi! > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:57:25AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > > In http://bugs.debian.org/47467, the bug submitter requests that chfn > > and chsh allow working on NIS accounts. > > > > As far as I understand, this should *now* be possible because these > > utilities are PAMified. Could you confirm (I know you're using a > > NIS setup, so this should be easy to test for you) ? > > I can confirm that PAM auth works fine now, but as for > changing anything on NIS server, it's IMHO impossible > with current libc (I may be wrong) -- for this there > are yppasswd, ypchsh and ypchfn tools... Well, the bug log seems to say the contraryas long as chsh and chfn are properly PAMified, they should be able to act on NIS. This already seems to be possible for passwd. I don't want to know about the details, I just want to know whether this should still be our problem about the proper PAMification of chsh and chfn.
Bug#47467: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
Hi! On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:57:25AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: > In http://bugs.debian.org/47467, the bug submitter requests that chfn > and chsh allow working on NIS accounts. > > As far as I understand, this should *now* be possible because these > utilities are PAMified. Could you confirm (I know you're using a > NIS setup, so this should be easy to test for you) ? I can confirm that PAM auth works fine now, but as for changing anything on NIS server, it's IMHO impossible with current libc (I may be wrong) -- for this there are yppasswd, ypchsh and ypchfn tools... BTW, NIS is broken in libc6/netgroup handling now -- see bug #328440. -- WBR, xrgtn
Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
Quoting Tomasz Kłoczko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > In form distributed in 4.0.12 this can't work because this two tools > aren't use pam_start() & co. :> > (it works for me only because I use pam_make for sync "files" and NIS .db; > now after review pam_unix soutrce code I know it can be prapared > directly by use pam_unix module). > > OK I'll try use chfn/chsh today with currnet version from CVS without > using pam_make. Well, no pressure on you about this which is not a vital feature. So, you can perfectly release 4.0.13 without the complete functionality if you prefer. I just need to know whether this bug is to be closed now, when 4.0.13 will be out...or when another version will be out.
Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005, Christian Perrier wrote: > Tomasz, > > In http://bugs.debian.org/47467, the bug submitter requests that chfn > and chsh allow working on NIS accounts. > > As far as I understand, this should *now* be possible because these > utilities are PAMified. Could you confirm (I know you're using a > NIS setup, so this should be easy to test for you) ? In form distributed in 4.0.12 this can't work because this two tools aren't use pam_start() & co. :> (it works for me only because I use pam_make for sync "files" and NIS .db; now after review pam_unix soutrce code I know it can be prapared directly by use pam_unix module). OK I'll try use chfn/chsh today with currnet version from CVS without using pam_make. kloczek -- --- *Ludzie nie majÄ problemów, tylko sobie sami je stwarzajÄ * --- Tomasz KÅoczko, sys adm @zie.pg.gda.pl|*e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#47467: #47467 to be closed by PAMification of chfn and chsh?
Tomasz, In http://bugs.debian.org/47467, the bug submitter requests that chfn and chsh allow working on NIS accounts. As far as I understand, this should *now* be possible because these utilities are PAMified. Could you confirm (I know you're using a NIS setup, so this should be easy to test for you) ?
