On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:55:55 -0500,
"Jacques A. Vidrine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It would also be helpful for us to (semi-)automatically update old
binaries installed by ports. (I have been trying this for a couple of
days)
Jacques Personally I don't want sysinstall or make world to touch
Seigo Tanimura writes:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 11:55:55 -0500,
"Jacques A. Vidrine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It would also be helpful for us to (semi-)automatically update old
binaries installed by ports. (I have been trying this for a couple of
days)
Jacques Personally I don't want
[cc'ed to -ports]
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 13:35:48 -0500 (CDT),
Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mike Seigo Tanimura writes:
Completely automatic update of installed ports is acutally difficult
because we cannot get to know the language or required toolkit from
the name of a binary. (eg
Seigo Tanimura writes:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2000 13:35:48 -0500 (CDT), Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Mike Seigo Tanimura writes:
Completely automatic update of installed ports is acutally difficult
because we cannot get to know the language or required toolkit from
the name of a binary.
On Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:08:12 -0500,
"Jacques A. Vidrine" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
n changing them now. Unless objections come up, I'll commit this change
n or something similar with the next nsswitch commit.
Here is another possible trouble. While libc.so.4 with nsswitch no
longer requires
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:50:53 +0900, Seigo Tanimura [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Here is another possible trouble. While libc.so.4 with nsswitch no
longer requires the magic '+' entry, libc.so.3 and earlier still
require '+'.
IMHO, This Is A Bug.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | O Siem / We
In the last episode (Sep 28), Garrett Wollman said:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 22:50:53 +0900, Seigo Tanimura
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Here is another possible trouble. While libc.so.4 with nsswitch no
longer requires the magic '+' entry, libc.so.3 and earlier still
require '+'.
IMHO, This Is
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 10:50:53PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
Here is another possible trouble. While libc.so.4 with nsswitch no
longer requires the magic '+' entry, libc.so.3 and earlier still
require '+'.
If one needs to support applications using libc.so.3, then one needs
to use the
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 10:24:01AM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote:
Depends on what Seigo meant. If he meant that libc.so.4 and no
/etc/nsswitch.conf implicitly adds a "+" to the end of /etc/passwd,
that's definitely a bug.
If you don't have an /etc/nsswitch.conf, then it behaves just like
On Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 12:10:39AM +0700, Max Khon wrote:
"passwd: compat" should require '+' if I understand it correctly
You understand correctly :-) Further, this is the default when there
is no /etc/nsswitch.conf.
--
Jacques Vidrine / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000 at 11:43:01PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
As we are supposed to fill in all of the members in struct passwd
(like Solaris), _pw_passwd should have its initial value other than
zero.
static struct passwd _pw_passwd =
{
"",
"",
(uid_t)0, /*
Kris,
I guess once this is committed, the patch I sent you for ssh will no
longer be necessary.
To the cc list: My patch just told ssh to
xstrdup(pw_class ? pw_class : "")
On Sun, Sep 24, 2000 at 11:43:01PM +0900, Seigo Tanimura wrote:
As we are supposed to fill in all of the members
12 matches
Mail list logo
