From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 25 23:35:43 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED9037B404 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:35:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from pursued-with.net (adsl-66-125-9-242.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net [66.125.9.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747D643F85 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:35:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net) Received: from pursued-with.net (fffinch [192.168.168.101]) by pursued-with.net (8.12.6/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h2Q7Zgs7062152; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:35:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:35:42 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) To: Matthew Seaman From: Kevin Stevens In-Reply-To: <20030326072922.GA5568@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophi> Message-Id: <8C8C94D2-5F5D-11D7-95E4-000A959CEE6A@pursued-with.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_APPLEMAIL autolearn=ham version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: File owner name not updated. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 07:35:45 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 07:35:45 -0000 On Tuesday, Mar 25, 2003, at 23:29 US/Pacific, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Two things occur to me: > > i) Did root use vipw(8) to edit the passwd database, or otherwise > run: > > # cap_mkdb /etc/master.passwd > > when the UID was changed? It's the value in the hashed > database cap_mkdb(1) builds that is used by the system. > Updating that should have instantaneous effect. Just used the pw command. However, note that this symptom persisted for over 24 hours. Last time it happened (on a 4.7 system) it persisted for several days if I recall, before I noticed/corrected it. > ii) You haven't said anything about what the source of your > password data is, which probably means you're just using the > flat file password database and not anything like NIS or LDAP. Correct. > If you are using a distributed database, then a degree of > latency while changes get propagated around the servers is to > be expected. However, that shouldn't take any more than a few > minutes in a well configured system. Right, and this is a standalone system (which is why I'm manually syncing up the uids in the first place). > The problem is not with the ls(1) command per se. It's the underlying > system library functions such as getpwuid(3) which do the translation > between numeric UIDs and usernames that are the seat of the problem. > You can see that by running some other command that uses getpwuid(3), > eg: > > % perl -e 'print scalar getpwuid(503), "\n";' Got it. I think what I'll do is create a dummy user with the same conditions and let it persist for awhile so we can experiment with it. KeS