On Sun, 28 Jan 2001 22:19:29 -0800 (PST) John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: JB> People whine about the problem though, so having no solution doesn't JB> help either. Since #include is syntatically a comment, it shouldn't JB> mess up other programs, though the idea is that they will all use the JB> API in libc and not be reading the file themselves. However, I do JB> think that doing it through nsswitch might be the best solution. Everything in the tree uses the API apart from adduser.perl. Do many ports use /etc/shells ? On the security issue, I rather like the idea that a none root port administrator is possible, this doesn't really need multiple shells files though so nsswitch works for me. I can't set it up though (no -current box). To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Louis A. Mamakos
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... John Baldwin
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Matt Dillon
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Vadim Belman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax suppo... Dag-Erling Smorgrav
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax ... sig
- Re: /etc/shells #include syn... Mike Meyer
- Re: /etc/shells #include... Sean O'Connell
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support patch Garrett Wollman
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Jacques A. Vidrine
- Re: /etc/shells #include syntax support p... Steve O'Hara-Smith