Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 13:27:31 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Design for extensible passwd[/shadow?] db support On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:16:28AM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > On Sunday, August 12, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > Any thought on the pros and cons of these or other appraches? > > > > This sounds like it should be a feature of the whole 'new platform' > suggestion you made on this list earlier, which I'd still like to > see gain some traction and definition. Yes and no. I think most users of our 'new platform' for non-server purposes would typically have 1-2 non-root users and thus no need for fancy user lookups. This sort of thing is needed for university and corporate use where you might easily have 10k-100k users and want to unify the user database (username/uid mappings) across all systems in your institution. > If it is a locally running daemon that resolves queries to some > specified format - what would be the fallback in case that daemon is getpwnam/getpwuid would simply fail. This is not unlike what happens when the NIS server is not reachable anyway. It could of course still scan /etc/passwd first, which would get users like nobody/daemon/etc. > not running or fails to launch? "Not running" and "fails to launch" don't make sense as separate cases unless you're thinking of some FDO-style monstrosity where daemons are launched as users lazily the first time they're needed. I'm not considering code to auto-launch daemons, just using a daemon that the admin would be responsible for starting if using this kind of setup. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.