--On Tuesday, July 24, 2001 14:06:12 -0400 Derrick J Brashear
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote:
>
>> --On Tuesday, July 24, 2001 01:21:43 -0400 Derrick J Brashear
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Does truss show anything useful happening? If not, try sotruss, and
>> > see if that tells you anything.
>>
>> This seems to be the relevant part from truss:
>
> pretty useless. what does sotruss tell you?
I can't get it to run with sendmail. The most sensible way to call it
seemed to be
sotruss -F /usr/lib/64/libpam.so.1:/usr/lib/security/sparcv9/libafs.so -T
/usr/lib/64/libpam.so.1:/usr/lib/security/sparcv9/libafs.so -f -o trusslog
/usr/lib/sendmail -bd -q30m
but that results in:
/bin/sotruss[86]: 16745 Segmentation Fault(coredump)
--On Tuesday, July 24, 2001 13:48:06 -0500 Charles Clancy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > What's interesting is that the SASL library apparently does
>> not use libpam,
>> > but instead it parses pam.conf itself and it accesses the modules
>> > directly... Not sure if that's relevant, though.
>>
>> The Cyrus SASL library? That doesn't sound right.
>
> No, it doesn't sound right at all. Why would they want to make
> themselves platform specific? There'd be all kinds of checks to see if
> they were using /etc/pam.conf or /etc/pam.d. Plus, they'd have to do
> checks for things like the $ISA that expands into sparcv9 for 64-bit
> applications on Solaris 8.
Maybe I'm wrong. I was drawing conclusions based on the fact that I could
see sendmail accessing /etc/pam.conf and the modules in a regular truss.
Maybe those accesses were *via* libpam?
Cheers, Sebastian Hagedorn
--
Sebastian Hagedorn M.A. - RZKR, Zimmer 18
Zentrum f�r angewandte Informatik - Unversit�tsweiter Service RRZK
Universit�t zu K�ln / Cologne University - Tel. +49-221-478-5587
PGP signature
