Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Nov 1996 10:43:59 -0600 (CST)
From:      "Lenny Tropiano" <lennyt@arlut.utexas.edu>
To:        wpaul@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu (Bill Paul)
Cc:        lennyt@arlut.utexas.edu, freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org, jkh@FreeBSD.org, gil@arlut.utexas.edu (Gil Kloepfer)
Subject:   Re: Problem getting NIS/yp to allow logins/su to users
Message-ID:  <199611211643.KAA29257@neelix.arlut.utexas.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199611211608.LAA19976@skynet.ctr.columbia.edu> from "Bill Paul" at Nov 21, 96 11:08:54 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'm starting to wonder about this. /bin/ls is statically linked, which
> means there's no question that it's using the correct NIS lookup routines.
> But /usr/bin/su is dynamically linked, which means it may be looking at
> the wrong libc.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't have a 2.1.6-RELEASE installation handy (my test
> box is running 2.2-ALPHA just at the moment) so I can't do a couple of
> the things I'd like to do, such as checking timestamps and sizes on
> /usr/lib/libc.so*.
[...]
> I'm mainly interested to know if you installed any of the compatibility 
> distributions (as in, compatibility with older versions of FreeBSD).
> These distributions include different copies of libc.so, and this might
> be the cause of the problem: I changed the way the pwd_mkdb(8) encodes
> the special '+' and '-' YP entries from /etc/master.passwd into the
> /etc/pwd.db and /etc/spwd.db hash databases. I also changed the code in
> getpwent(3) in libc to match. The trouble is that if you rebuild your
> user database with pwd_mkdb(8) from 2.1.5 or 2.1.6, then programs that
> use the getpwent(3) code from 2.1.0 or earlier will _not_ be able to
> see the special + entries and will therefore assume that NIS is turned
> off. 2.1.5 and 2.1.6 can read databases from 2.1.0 correctly, but not
> the other way around.
> 
> I'm worried that somehow you managed to install one of the older 'compat'
> versions of libc.so on your system instead of the correct one (or maybe
> that somehow somebody packed the wrong libc in the distribution). One way
> this might have happened is if the version numbers are the same: the new
> one may have been overwritten by the old one. 

You hit it right on the head!!

THanks!

libc.so.2.2 is what's in 2.1.6-RELEASE, but it should be later, since
the 2.x compatibility library also has a libc.so.2.2, which overwrote it
with an older version.

It works now.

-- 
Lenny Tropiano | Sr. Operating Systems Specialist Ph# (512) 835-3663 / 604-1166
Information Technology Group, Office: S252        Fax (512) 490-4220 / 835-3100 
Applied Research Laboratories of UT Austin  E-Mail: lennyt@arlut.utexas.edu
P.O. Box 8029, Austin, Texas  78713-8029    Home E-mail: lenny@icus.com
10000 Burnet Rd, Austin Texas 78758         URL: http://www.icus.com/~lenny/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611211643.KAA29257>