> I think might be a problem. Those are the 32 bit modules. I don't think > you're running the system 32 bit, so apps requesting 64 bit pam will not be > happy. > I think you should try with $ISA (implicit for the relative names), something > like that: > /opt/csw/lib/$ISA/security/pam_winbind.so
I initially dropped the 64-bit versions in and it freaked out big style (couldn't login initially). The netatalk bit seems to be running fine with those as well. Does samba even use PAM for talking with winbind or deal directly? >> Thanks again, output of testparm is below (sanitised a little): > > I don't see anything trivially wrong, but it's been a while. My only concern > is why are you using the tdb backend instead of something deterministic like > rid? But it should not be an issue here. I hope you can get some details from > the AD side. It doesn't look like it's asking the AD oddly (yet the PAM modules do), I need to run Wireshark on there and see what's actually happening. Thanksm James. _______________________________________________ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
