From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Guillaume Rousse Subject: Re: some questions about the configuration Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:38:47 +0100 Message-ID: <43DA3077.7090008@inria.fr> References: <43D4F1E0.2060201@inria.fr> <43D8F3DE.5080003@inria.fr> <17369.661.597510.89926@segfault.boston.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <17369.661.597510.89926@segfault.boston.redhat.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org Errors-To: autofs-bounces@linux.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" Cc: autofs@linux.kernel.org Jeff Moyer wrote: > Guillaume.Rousse> OK, I understand they have different nature, so they > Guillaume.Rousse> can't have the exact same naming scheme. But if auto.= smb > Guillaume.Rousse> and auto.smb are exemple, they should not get install= ed, > Guillaume.Rousse> and especially not among configuration files whereas = they > Guillaume.Rousse> are executables programs. >=20 > Guillaume.Rousse> I'd rather have called ldap.master.map, smb.user.map = and > Guillaume.Rousse> net.user.map, or something similar, and have them > Guillaume.Rousse> installed in the same place. >=20 > You can modify auto.net or auto.smb to suit your needs. In that sense, > they are user-configurable automounter maps, and belong with the other > maps. I understand that autofs configuration is a bit overwhelming, an= d > the documentation is lacking. Perhaps we should focus on improving the > documentation. This does still look like a poor hack: if they are supposed to be=20 adaptable to specific user needs, they should use a configuration file.=20 And if the not flexible enough, be kept as exemples in congifuration,=20 not installed by default (especially if not automatically used). And yes, documentation could get improved :) >>>The master map and the maps that are contained in the master map have = a >>>different syntax. >>> >>> >>> >>>>Second, it's not clear why ldap and nis use are triggered from the >>>>content of /etc/nsswitch.conf, while smb and net (simple rpcinfo >>>>listing) use are triggered from content of /etc/auto.master. Shouldn'= t >>>>all those syntax be available from both locations? >>> >>> >>>Master vs client maps again. >=20 > Guillaume.Rousse> According to my init script understanding, however, i= t > Guillaume.Rousse> seems you can't refer to LDAP user maps from > Guillaume.Rousse> /etc/auto.master, whereas you can refer to NIS user m= aps > Guillaume.Rousse> from there, using a syntax such as '+foobar', which i= s > Guillaume.Rousse> not documented in auto.master man page. >=20 > Your understanding is wholly incorrect. The following web sites are go= od > references that I use frequently. I hope they are helpful to you. >=20 > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/805-3479/6j3agk1v5?q=3Dautofs&a=3Dview > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/816-0211/6m6nc66nc?a=3Dview > http://www.ldapguru.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=3D2029&for= um=3D6 Thanks for the explanation, I understand better. Let me rephrase: - it is possible to refer to additional NIS master map from=20 /etc/auto.master, using a syntax not described in auto.master man page. - it is not possible to do the same with ldap Is this more correct ? BTW, the default init script is quite ugly, it calls catnismap with each=20 additional NIS master map each time a line is found beginning with '+'. I'd suggest instead something as: if [ -f /etc/auto.master ] ; then awk '/^[^#]/{print $0}' /etc/auto.master | ( while read line do if [[ "$line" =3D=3D +* ]]; then catnismap ${line:1} else echo $line fi done ) fi It uses bash-specific constructs, but this is a bash script after all. --=20 After assembly, it will always be observed that the gasket is on the benc= h -- Assembly General Shefields Corollaries n=B04