Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 5 May 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Yep, these modules don't exist in -STABLE. You should keep your old /etc/pam.conf around for -STABLE programs. I thought that pam ignored pam.conf if /etc/pam.d exists? -CURRENT's PAM does, -STABLE's doesn't. Or are you saying that I should make /etc/pam.d/xdm look just like the old settings? I'm happy to test ideas to try and make this work, but I don't really know anything about pam. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 04:36:41AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: modules and doesn't clobber your old 4.x modules. I asked David to put libpam and the PAM modules in COMPAT4X, but never heard back from him. I guess I need clarification. Since PAM modules aren't versioned, is there a problem? Or did you rename all the modules with OpenPAM? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 11:16:22PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: Ok, I put the following in /usr/lib/compat, from my releng_4 box: libc.so.4 libc_r.a libc_r.so.4 libpam.a libpam.so.1 libpam_ssh.a There is no need for .a's in /usr/lib/compat -- think about it. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On Sat, 4 May 2002, David O'Brien wrote: On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 11:16:22PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: Ok, I put the following in /usr/lib/compat, from my releng_4 box: libc.so.4 libc_r.a libc_r.so.4 libpam.a libpam.so.1 libpam_ssh.a There is no need for .a's in /usr/lib/compat -- think about it. I didn't think so either, but I am grasping at straws here... -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_nologin.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so Yep, these modules don't exist in -STABLE. You should keep your old /etc/pam.conf around for -STABLE programs. unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opie.so) [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so It seems libopie should have had its major bumped with libc, but didn't. But why on earth is xdm trying to use pam_opie? DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 5 May 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_nologin.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so Yep, these modules don't exist in -STABLE. You should keep your old /etc/pam.conf around for -STABLE programs. I thought that pam ignored pam.conf if /etc/pam.d exists? Or are you saying that I should make /etc/pam.d/xdm look just like the old settings? I'm happy to test ideas to try and make this work, but I don't really know anything about pam. -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 30 Apr 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I saw that actually... but (not coredumping) != (lets users log in). :) Should I update and try again? Argh. Just replace pam_lastlog with pam_permit for now. I'll try to find out exactly what is happening. Ok, I updated to today's -current, including v. 1.4 of /etc/pam.d/xdm, and still no joy: PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_unix.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so: Undefined symbol setnetconfig] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opie.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so Now, I had this in /usr/lib: -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4548 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_deny.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 5132 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 5812 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_opie.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 6408 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 7924 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_login_access.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 5616 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 6340 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_ftp.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4556 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_rootok.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4932 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_self.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4588 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_permit.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 5312 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_securetty.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 8800 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_radius.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 41048 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_unix.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 8516 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_tacplus.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 12092 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_ssh.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 6356 Feb 24 18:01 /usr/lib/pam_wheel.so -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4888 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 5188 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_ftp.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3108 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_deny.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 6572 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_login_access.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3116 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_permit.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 7452 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_radius.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 39396 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_passwdqc.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3776 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4644 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_opie.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4396 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 7236 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_tacplus.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3484 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_rhosts.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3332 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_rootok.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3900 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_securetty.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 3592 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_self.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 9776 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_ssh.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 16044 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_unix.so.2 -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 4980 May 4 17:40 /usr/lib/pam_wheel.so.2 I replaced all the .so's with links to *.so.2, and now I get: PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_nologin.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so: Undefined symbol _openpam_log] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_unix.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so: Undefined symbol __pw_scan] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opie.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so: Undefined symbol _openpam_log] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so: Undefined symbol _openpam_log] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so Either way, I still can't log in via xdm. -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ok, I updated to today's -current, including v. 1.4 of /etc/pam.d/xdm, and still no joy: PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_unix.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so: Undefined symbol setnetconfig] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_unix.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opie.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so PAM unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) PAM [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] PAM adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so That's right, I'd forgotten - the old PAM modules don't like libc.so.5. Not much I can do about that :( I'm afraid you'll have to rebuild X. I replaced all the .so's with links to *.so.2, and now I get: That will most definitely not work. The version numbers are there for a reason. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 5 May 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: That's right, I'd forgotten - the old PAM modules don't like libc.so.5. Not much I can do about that :( I'm afraid you'll have to rebuild X. Then I'm back to my original point. I think that breaking binary compatibility for all 4.x pam applications is a very bad idea. -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Then I'm back to my original point. I think that breaking binary compatibility for all 4.x pam applications is a very bad idea. It was already broken. There's nothing you can do about it. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Then I'm back to my original point. I think that breaking binary compatibility for all 4.x pam applications is a very bad idea. It was already broken. There's nothing you can do about it. Hmm, let me amend this: it's broken for you because you have a pre- OpenPAM libpam + modules that was built on 5.0. You wouldn't see this if you'd upgraded straight from 4.x, because OpenPAM uses versioned modules and doesn't clobber your old 4.x modules. I asked David to put libpam and the PAM modules in COMPAT4X, but never heard back from him. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 5 May 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Dag-Erling Smorgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Then I'm back to my original point. I think that breaking binary compatibility for all 4.x pam applications is a very bad idea. It was already broken. There's nothing you can do about it. Hmm, let me amend this: it's broken for you because you have a pre- OpenPAM libpam + modules that was built on 5.0. You wouldn't see this if you'd upgraded straight from 4.x, because OpenPAM uses versioned modules and doesn't clobber your old 4.x modules. I asked David to put libpam and the PAM modules in COMPAT4X, but never heard back from him. Ok, I put the following in /usr/lib/compat, from my releng_4 box: libc.so.4 libc_r.a libc_r.so.4 libpam.a libpam.so.1 libpam_ssh.a And tried the following from the same box in both /usr/lib and /usr/lib/compat: pam_cleartext_pass_ok.so pam_deny.so pam_opie.so pam_permit.so pam_radius.so pam_skey.so pam_ssh.so pam_tacplus.so pam_unix.so Still the same errors: unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_nologin.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_nologin.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opie.so) [dlerror: /usr/lib/libopie.so.2: Undefined symbol __xuname] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opie.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_opieaccess.so unable to dlopen(/usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so) [dlerror: Cannot open /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so] adding faulty module: /usr/lib/pam_lastlog.so -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I saw that actually... but (not coredumping) != (lets users log in). :) Should I update and try again? Argh. Just replace pam_lastlog with pam_permit for now. I'll try to find out exactly what is happening. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 27-Apr-2002 Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please back out revision 1.3 of src/etc/pam.d/xdm since it breaks xdm. xdm core dumps with a signal 6 if there is no session management configured for it in PAM. Obviously this commmit wasn't actually tested with xdm (at least not on X 4). Yes, it was. Please show me the output of 'ldd /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm'. ldd `which xdm` /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm: libXpm.so.4 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXpm.so.4 (0x2807e000) libXmu.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXmu.so.6 (0x2808c000) libXt.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 (0x280a1000) libSM.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libSM.so.6 (0x280ec000) libICE.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libICE.so.6 (0x280f5000) libXext.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x2810b000) libX11.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x28119000) librpcsvc.so.2 = /usr/lib/librpcsvc.so.2 (0x281f5000) libpam.so.1 = /usr/lib/libpam.so.1 (0x281fd000) libcrypt.so.2 = /usr/lib/libcrypt.so.2 (0x28207000) libutil.so.3 = /usr/lib/libutil.so.3 (0x2822) libc.so.5 = /usr/lib/libc.so.5 (0x28229000) libXThrStub.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXThrStub.so.6 (0x282db000) It may be that my version of X is too old (a week or so before 4.2.0). -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ldd `which xdm` /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm: libXpm.so.4 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXpm.so.4 (0x2807e000) libXmu.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXmu.so.6 (0x2808c000) libXt.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 (0x280a1000) libSM.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libSM.so.6 (0x280ec000) libICE.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libICE.so.6 (0x280f5000) libXext.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x2810b000) libX11.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x28119000) librpcsvc.so.2 = /usr/lib/librpcsvc.so.2 (0x281f5000) libpam.so.1 = /usr/lib/libpam.so.1 (0x281fd000) libcrypt.so.2 = /usr/lib/libcrypt.so.2 (0x28207000) libutil.so.3 = /usr/lib/libutil.so.3 (0x2822) libc.so.5 = /usr/lib/libc.so.5 (0x28229000) libXThrStub.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXThrStub.so.6 (0x282db000) It may be that my version of X is too old (a week or so before 4.2.0). It's linked against Linux-PAM (libpam.so.1 rather than libpam.so.2). A bug (misfeature?) in xdm's conversation function makes it crash when it tries to run pam_lastlog. Changing pam_lastlog to pam_permit in /etc/pam.d/other, or adding no_warn to the pam_lastlog entry, should hide the bug. Linux-PAM uses the session chain from the other policy because the xdm policy does not have one, while OpenPAM would only use the other policy if there was no xdm policy at all. The former is traditional, but surprising if you're not familiar with PAM. I have patches that make OpenPAM do this, but I'm not entirely certain if tradition should win over simplicity in this case. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 29-Apr-2002 Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ldd `which xdm` /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm: libXpm.so.4 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXpm.so.4 (0x2807e000) libXmu.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXmu.so.6 (0x2808c000) libXt.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXt.so.6 (0x280a1000) libSM.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libSM.so.6 (0x280ec000) libICE.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libICE.so.6 (0x280f5000) libXext.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x2810b000) libX11.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x28119000) librpcsvc.so.2 = /usr/lib/librpcsvc.so.2 (0x281f5000) libpam.so.1 = /usr/lib/libpam.so.1 (0x281fd000) libcrypt.so.2 = /usr/lib/libcrypt.so.2 (0x28207000) libutil.so.3 = /usr/lib/libutil.so.3 (0x2822) libc.so.5 = /usr/lib/libc.so.5 (0x28229000) libXThrStub.so.6 = /usr/X11R6/lib/libXThrStub.so.6 (0x282db000) It may be that my version of X is too old (a week or so before 4.2.0). It's linked against Linux-PAM (libpam.so.1 rather than libpam.so.2). A bug (misfeature?) in xdm's conversation function makes it crash when it tries to run pam_lastlog. Changing pam_lastlog to pam_permit in /etc/pam.d/other, or adding no_warn to the pam_lastlog entry, should hide the bug. Ah, so the bug is my binary is too old and is linked against the wrong PAM. Ok, my bad then. -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah, so the bug is my binary is too old and is linked against the wrong PAM. Ok, my bad then. Well, yes and no. There is a bug in xdm which is exposed by the combination of Linux-PAM and FreeBSD's stock PAM configuration. A slightly different configuration would not trigger it, nor would the current version of OpenPAM. I'd say the blame is evenly spread. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Is there any chance that this can be fixed in such a way that 3rd party binaries, like the xdm which comes with X as distributed by xfree86.org will work OOB? Breaking binary compat will be a fairly big obstacle for adoption of 5.x we have a hard enough time getting vendors to support us as it is. Doug On 29 Apr 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah, so the bug is my binary is too old and is linked against the wrong PAM. Ok, my bad then. Well, yes and no. There is a bug in xdm which is exposed by the combination of Linux-PAM and FreeBSD's stock PAM configuration. A slightly different configuration would not trigger it, nor would the current version of OpenPAM. I'd say the blame is evenly spread. DES -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is there any chance that this can be fixed in such a way that 3rd party binaries, like the xdm which comes with X as distributed by xfree86.org will work OOB? Yes, please see my last commit to etc/pam.d/other. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
On 30 Apr 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: Doug Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Is there any chance that this can be fixed in such a way that 3rd party binaries, like the xdm which comes with X as distributed by xfree86.org will work OOB? Yes, please see my last commit to etc/pam.d/other. I saw that actually... but (not coredumping) != (lets users log in). :) Should I update and try again? -- We have known freedom's price. We have shown freedom's power. And in this great conflict, ... we will see freedom's victory. - George W. Bush, President of the United States State of the Union, January 28, 2002 Do YOU Yahoo!? To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
Re: xdm broken on current
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please back out revision 1.3 of src/etc/pam.d/xdm since it breaks xdm. xdm core dumps with a signal 6 if there is no session management configured for it in PAM. Obviously this commmit wasn't actually tested with xdm (at least not on X 4). Yes, it was. Please show me the output of 'ldd /usr/X11R6/bin/xdm'. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
xdm broken on current
Please back out revision 1.3 of src/etc/pam.d/xdm since it breaks xdm. xdm core dumps with a signal 6 if there is no session management configured for it in PAM. Obviously this commmit wasn't actually tested with xdm (at least not on X 4). In revision 1.19 of pam.conf Mark Murray changed the session management for xdm to use pam_unix instead of pam_deny with no apparent reason why. (The log message doesn't say why that change was made.) -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
RE: xdm broken on current
On 26-Apr-2002 John Baldwin wrote: Please back out revision 1.3 of src/etc/pam.d/xdm since it breaks xdm. xdm core dumps with a signal 6 if there is no session management configured for it in PAM. Obviously this commmit wasn't actually tested with xdm (at least not on X 4). In revision 1.19 of pam.conf Mark Murray changed the session management for xdm to use pam_unix instead of pam_deny with no apparent reason why. (The log message doesn't say why that change was made.) Erm, I should finish that thought: So perhaps it can use pam_deny or some such instead of pam_unix if using pam_unix is bad? -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-current in the body of the message
