At 02:02 PM 6/5/2002 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> At 07:06 PM 6/3/2002 +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 09:57:40PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: >> >> a) keep lookup_name() as it is? >> >> b) remove it entirely? >> >> c) call it whenever a SID is missing from a passwd/group entry, using >> >> user independent search rules (except if a user looks up itself)? >> > >> >I think b) is the way to go. IMHO we should deprecate using ntsec >> >w/o SID in the passwd/group files. >> >would you mind to look over that again? I've just rearranged reading >passwd and group files and found an easy method to have useful passwd >and group info including SIDs even if both files are unavailable.
Hello Corinna, I saw the changes in grp.cc and passwd.cc where you make default entries from the token. That's a good idea, very close to what I had in mind for the "except" clause" in suggestion c) above. At any rate this doesn't favor keeping lookup_name() and using it up only in alloc_sd(). So you could still apply my patches, even if you want to move from b) to the direction of c). >However, I think calling lookup_name in internal_getlogin() is >somewhat useless. I agree. My patches remove it, but replace it with something similar. I will remove it later if you apply them. By the way, your ChangeLog entry is missing "* passwd.cc " :) :) :) Pierre