Sylvain Beucler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tapota : >> > https://mail.gna.org/public/savane-dev/2004-09/msg00241.html >> > >> > Anyway, >> > $sys_authorized_keys_options >> > or >> > $sys_ssh_user_options >> > would be indeed more appropriate. >> >> Hum, okey. By prefix I was thinking of a prefix on the file. >> >> I would go for >> $sys_authorized_keys_command > > Hmm, I checked the 'official' SSH terminology: > ----- > $ man sshd > AUTHORIZED_KEYS FILE FORMAT > > ... Each protocol version 2 public key consists of: options, keytype, > base64 encoded key, comment. ... > > ... The options (if present) consist of comma-separated option > specifications. No spaces are permitted, except within double quotes. > The following option specifications are supported (note that option > keywords are case-insensitive): ... > ----- > > So the right word seems to be 'option', or 'option specifications'. It > is not just a command.
Ok, so let's go for option. >> I was only saying that this kind of thing are likely to be very >> installation-specific and I'm not sure it is a real plus to include >> it, since it could be confusing. > > I see the point. However, if we can provide a way to manage several > mail domains Mailman installation, without breaking a 'single domain' > Mailman installation, that would be a generic improvement, wouldn't > it? Sure. At this point I was talking about the stuff related to chroot. -- Mathieu Roy +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | General Homepage: http://yeupou.coleumes.org/ | | Computing Homepage: http://alberich.coleumes.org/ | | Not a native english speaker: | | http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Savane-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/savane-dev
