On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 06:50:09PM +0200, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
> Le Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:26:47 +0200,
> Mateusz Guzik a ?crit :
>
> Hello,
>
> > > > I'm seeing a panic while trying to build a poudriere repository.
> > > >
> > > > As far I can see it always happens when gam_server is started
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 16.07.2013 04:28, Daniel Eischen wrote:
[ ... ]
I think something is lost on me here. getpwent/getpwuid do
not return the password hashes in the returned struct passwd
unless the calling process is root.
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 16.07.2013 04:28, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 16.07.2013 00:47, Ben Morrow wrote:
Quoth Jan Bramkamp :
On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
anyway?
On 07/15/13 22:28, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> I think something is lost on me here. getpwent/getpwuid do
> not return the password hashes in the returned struct passwd
> unless the calling process is root. So you have to be root in
> order to see the hashes anyway. Not all users are going to
> hav
On 16.07.2013 04:28, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
>
>> On 16.07.2013 00:47, Ben Morrow wrote:
>>> Quoth Jan Bramkamp :
On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
> anyway?
PAM and NS
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 16.07.2013 00:47, Ben Morrow wrote:
Quoth Jan Bramkamp :
On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
anyway?
PAM and NSS switch are two different subsystems. NSS is just for
resource lookups (us
On 16.07.2013 00:47, Ben Morrow wrote:
> Quoth Jan Bramkamp :
>> On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
>>> anyway?
>> PAM and NSS switch are two different subsystems. NSS is just for
>> resource lookups (users, groups, hosts, ...).
Quoth Jan Bramkamp :
> On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> >
> > Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
> > anyway?
> PAM and NSS switch are two different subsystems. NSS is just for
> resource lookups (users, groups, hosts, ...). PAM is for access control.
>
> With ldap i
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
anyway?
PAM and NSS switch are two different subsystems. NSS is just for
resource lookups (users, groups, hosts, ...). PAM is for access control.
With lda
This reminds me of my local patch which I wrote and forgot about deep in
the git :)
This hack was required to have working USB ports on X61 after resume,
but I'm not sure whether it's still required because I don't have X61 handy
anymore...
On Mon, 8 Jul 2013 11:09:20 -0700
Adrian Chadd wrote:
On 15.07.2013 21:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
> anyway?
PAM and NSS switch are two different subsystems. NSS is just for
resource lookups (users, groups, hosts, ...). PAM is for access control.
With ldap in nsswitch.conf for users and groups
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 15.07.2013 21:44, Daniel Eischen wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 15.07.2013 21:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Michael
Loftis wrote:
nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
your co
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013, at 14:51, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> Wouldn't it be easier just to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf
> anyway?
>
Yes, but bad things happen if you're upgrading a server and there are
library changes but you've left it in the pam.d/* files. I guess I
wasn't very specific.
_
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Mark Felder wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013, at 14:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:
Ok, thanks. But shouldn't the documentation be changed
to reflect that?
Whoa, I need to test this now, as we are used to being able to turn this
on/off by editing /etc/pam.d/system and sshd
Would
On 15.07.2013 21:44, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
>
>> On 15.07.2013 21:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Michael
>> Loftis wrote:
>>>
nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
your configuration you've expose
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
On 15.07.2013 21:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Michael
Loftis wrote:
nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
your configuration you've exposed I think you're ending up with that
behavior and not using pa
On 15.07.2013 21:25, Mark Felder wrote:> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013, at 14:19,
Jan Bramkamp wrote:
>>
>> More than that. In my opinion it should be updated by replacing nss_ldap
>> and pam_ldap with nss-pam-ldapd which splits the job of both into a
>> shared daemon talking to the LDAP server and small st
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013, at 14:19, Jan Bramkamp wrote:
>
> More than that. In my opinion it should be updated by replacing nss_ldap
> and pam_ldap with nss-pam-ldapd which splits the job of both into a
> shared daemon talking to the LDAP server and small stubs linked into the
> NSS / PAM using proces
On 15.07.2013 21:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Michael
Loftis wrote:
>
>> nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
>> your configuration you've exposed I think you're ending up with that
>> behavior and not using pam_ldap at all. Instead the authenti
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013, at 14:09, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> Ok, thanks. But shouldn't the documentation be changed
> to reflect that?
>
Whoa, I need to test this now, as we are used to being able to turn this
on/off by editing /etc/pam.d/system and sshd
___
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013, Michael Loftis wrote:
nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
your configuration you've exposed I think you're ending up with that
behavior and not using pam_ldap at all. Instead the authentication is
happening via nsswitch fulfilling getpwent
nss_ldap fulfills most of the get*ent calls, thus based on the bits of
your configuration you've exposed I think you're ending up with that
behavior and not using pam_ldap at all. Instead the authentication is
happening via nsswitch fulfilling getpwent() call's (the passwd: files
ldap line in nssw
There's an article on LDAP authentication on FreeBSD here:
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/ldap-auth/article.html#client
I'm confused as to why pam_ldap and nss_ldap do not need
/etc/pam.d entries, as described in the above link in
section 3.1.1. Meaning, I do not have any ldap entries
Op maandag 15 juli 2013 schreef Sergey Kandaurov (pluk...@gmail.com) het
volgende:
> On 15 July 2013 14:02, Johan Hendriks >
> wrote:
> > We use basic supermicro cases for our storage servers in combination
> with a
> > LSI 9211-8i controller in IT mode.
> >
> > Since 9.1 or shortly there after we
Le Mon, 15 Jul 2013 16:26:47 +0200,
Mateusz Guzik a écrit :
Hello,
> > > I'm seeing a panic while trying to build a poudriere repository.
> > >
> > > As far I can see it always happens when gam_server is started (ie
> > > xfce is running) and under disk load (poudriere bulk build) :
> > > (That
On 7/15/13 7:13 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:48:40AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
On 7/15/13 5:44 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Andre, we have a number of people running this patch in
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 04:33:53PM +0200, Patrick Lamaiziere wrote:
> Le Sun, 14 Jul 2013 11:59:53 +0200,
> Patrick Lamaiziere a écrit :
>
> Hello,
>
> > 9.2 PRERELEASE (today) / amd64
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm seeing a panic while trying to build a poudriere repository.
> >
> > As far I can
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Glen Barber wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:48:40AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > On 7/15/13 5:44 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > >On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> > >>On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> > >>>Andre, we have a numbe
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 05:48:40AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> On 7/15/13 5:44 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> >On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> >>On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> >>>Andre, we have a number of people running this patch in the
> >>>following configuratio
On 7/15/13 5:44 AM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Andre, we have a number of people running this patch in the
following configurations:
6-8GB ram + 10gigE ethernet using iozone over NFS.
As you haven't seen an
On 15.07.2013 08:38, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 13.07.2013 09:47, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Andre, we have a number of people running this patch in the following
configurations:
6-8GB ram + 10gigE ethernet using iozone over NFS.
As you haven't seen any problems yet I've asked RE to green light
On 15.07.2013 14:10, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
On 15 July 2013 14:02, Johan Hendriks wrote:
We use basic supermicro cases for our storage servers in combination with a
LSI 9211-8i controller in IT mode.
Since 9.1 or shortly there after we get for every disk we attach to the SAS
backplane the fol
On 15 July 2013 14:02, Johan Hendriks wrote:
> We use basic supermicro cases for our storage servers in combination with a
> LSI 9211-8i controller in IT mode.
>
> Since 9.1 or shortly there after we get for every disk we attach to the SAS
> backplane the following error.
>
> make_dev_physpath_ali
Note: to view an individual PR, use:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number).
The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users.
These represent problem reports covering all versions including
experimental development code and obsolete releases.
S Tracker
We use basic supermicro cases for our storage servers in combination
with a LSI 9211-8i controller in IT mode.
Since 9.1 or shortly there after we get for every disk we attach to the
SAS backplane the following error.
make_dev_physpath_alias: WARNING - Unable to alias
gptid/abb586f5-da8d-11e
On 15 July 2013 11:05, Ian Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 01:58:56 +0400, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> > On 15 July 2013 00:19, Torfinn Ingolfsen
> wrote:
> > > There is an error in the chmod(1) man page.
> > > tingo@kg-v2$ uname -a
> > > FreeBSD kg-v2.kg4.no 8.3-STABLE FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE #
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 01:58:56 +0400, Sergey Kandaurov wrote:
> On 15 July 2013 00:19, Torfinn Ingolfsen
> wrote:
> > There is an error in the chmod(1) man page.
> > tingo@kg-v2$ uname -a
> > FreeBSD kg-v2.kg4.no 8.3-STABLE FreeBSD 8.3-STABLE #6: Fri Apr 27 23:50:55
> > CEST 2012
> > r.
37 matches
Mail list logo
