[patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Peter Schiffer]

Hello,

I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the 
nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct 
place where this information on the man page should be placed. Any 
comments are welcome.

Source for this update is comment in initgroups.c file on line 135 in 
glibc [1].

Version of the man pages: 3.38


Thanks,

peter


[1] 
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=grp/initgroups.c;h=62fd1fc6de5f9ea08f31134c5ab9a36ae2d5af9e;hb=HEAD



--- nsswitch.conf.5.orig    2012-03-24 19:47:30.000000000 +0100
+++ nsswitch.conf.5    2012-03-28 20:10:37.268495257 +0200
@@ -201,6 +201,9 @@
  .B notfound
  The lookup process succeeded, but the needed value was not found.
  The default action is `continue'.
+For compatibility reasons, if the selected action for the `group' database
+is `return' and the configuration file does not contain the 
`initgroups' line,
+the next service is always used to search for more entries.
  .TP
  .B unavail
  The service is permanently unavailable.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Mark R Bannister]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 814 bytes --]

On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the 
> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct 
> place where this information on the man page should be placed. Any 
> comments are welcome.
>

Hi Peter,

I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf

I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I 
suggest you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also 
suggest that if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll 
need to add some further description somewhere that explains what this 
is and when you would use it.

Best regards,
Mark Bannister.


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4930 bytes --]

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
<mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the
>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct place
>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any comments are
>> welcome.
>>
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>
> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I suggest
> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also suggest that
> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add some
> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you would
> use it.

I'll incorporate Mark's changes soon.

@Peter: you don't need to rebase your patch--I'll do the work needed.
(@Mark: it's a risky path to rebase a patch off another patch that
isn't yet upstreamed; I wouldn't generally advise it.)

Thanks,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
<mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the
>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct place
>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any comments are
>> welcome.
>>
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>
> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I suggest
> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also suggest that
> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add some
> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you would
> use it.

Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
would you be able to review Peter's patch?

Thanks,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Mark R Bannister]

On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the
>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct place
>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any comments are
>>> welcome.
>>>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>
>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I suggest
>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also suggest that
>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add some
>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you would
>> use it.
> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>

I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this 
effect in grp/initgroups.c ?

I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest 
version but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not 
witnessing this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups 
line, and this entry:

     group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files

...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not 
contain the group entry that I am searching for.

So I don't concur with the suggested change ...

Best regards,
Mark.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Mark R Bannister
<mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the
>>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct
>>>> place
>>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any comments
>>>> are
>>>> welcome.
>>>>
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>>
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>>
>>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I
>>> suggest
>>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also suggest
>>> that
>>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add some
>>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you
>>> would
>>> use it.
>>
>> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
>> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
> I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this effect in
> grp/initgroups.c ?

Follow Peter's URL.

> I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest version
> but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not witnessing
> this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups line, and this
> entry:
>
>    group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files
>
> ...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not contain
> the group entry that I am searching for.
>
> So I don't concur with the suggested change ...

It looks like the change only arrived in glibc 2.14. Would you be able
to take a look there?

Thanks,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Peter Schiffer]

Hello guys,

thanks for looking into this. I am adding some notes below:

On 03/30/2012 01:27 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Mark R Bannister
> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>> On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>    wrote:
>>>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on the
>>>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the correct
>>>>> place
>>>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any comments
>>>>> are
>>>>> welcome.
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>>>
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>>>
>>>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I
>>>> suggest
>>>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also suggest
>>>> that
>>>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add some
>>>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you
>>>> would
>>>> use it.
>>> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
>>> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>> I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this effect in
>> grp/initgroups.c ?
> Follow Peter's URL.
>
>> I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest version
>> but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not witnessing
>> this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups line, and this
>> entry:
>>
>>     group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files
>>
>> ...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not contain
>> the group entry that I am searching for.
>>
>> So I don't concur with the suggested change ...
The result is always as expected, the added note should clarify how
the search is done. Important example would be like this:

group:      files [!NOTFOUND=return] XXXXXX

what means, according to the current text in the man page, that if the
result from "files" is either SUCCESS, UNAVAIL or TRYAGAIN, then,
it should be returned. Well, it is, but the XXXXXX is also _always_ 
searched.
Without the suggested note, it can be confusing while testing or setting up,
also, if the XXXXXX is some remote service, this can create some hard to 
find
delays.

Thanks,

peter
> It looks like the change only arrived in glibc 2.14. Would you be able
> to take a look there?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Peter Schiffer]

Hello,

I've updated the patch against the latest man-pages 3.41.
Also, I've added description of the initgroups database,
reformulated the note and moved it to the return action.

What do you think?

Thanks,

peter


--- nsswitch.conf.5.org    2012-05-10 22:13:23.000000000 +0200
+++ nsswitch.conf.5    2012-05-30 11:16:26.881542800 +0200
@@ -59,6 +59,11 @@
  .BR gethostbyname (3)
  and related functions.
  .TP
+.B initgroups
+Supplementary group access list, used by
+.BR getgrouplist (3)
+function.
+.TP
  .B netgroup
  Network-wide list of hosts and users, used for access rules.
  C libraries before glibc 2.1 supported netgroups only over NIS.
@@ -241,6 +246,10 @@
  .B return
  Return a result now.
  Do not call any further lookup functions.
+However, for compatibility reasons, if this is the selected action
+for the `group' database and the `notfound' status,
+and the configuration file does not contain the `initgroups' line,
+the next lookup function is always called, without affecting the search 
result.
  .TP
  .B continue
  Call the next lookup function.


On 03/30/2012 09:17 AM, Peter Schiffer wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> thanks for looking into this. I am adding some notes below:
>
> On 03/30/2012 01:27 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Mark R Bannister
>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>> On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>    wrote:
>>>>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am suggesting the following update of the  "notfound" status on 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the 
>>>>>> correct
>>>>>> place
>>>>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any 
>>>>>> comments
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>
>>>>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I
>>>>> suggest
>>>>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also 
>>>>> suggest
>>>>> that
>>>>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to 
>>>>> add some
>>>>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you
>>>>> would
>>>>> use it.
>>>> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
>>>> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>> I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this 
>>> effect in
>>> grp/initgroups.c ?
>> Follow Peter's URL.
>>
>>> I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest 
>>> version
>>> but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not 
>>> witnessing
>>> this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups line, and this
>>> entry:
>>>
>>>     group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files
>>>
>>> ...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not 
>>> contain
>>> the group entry that I am searching for.
>>>
>>> So I don't concur with the suggested change ...
> The result is always as expected, the added note should clarify how
> the search is done. Important example would be like this:
>
> group:      files [!NOTFOUND=return] XXXXXX
>
> what means, according to the current text in the man page, that if the
> result from "files" is either SUCCESS, UNAVAIL or TRYAGAIN, then,
> it should be returned. Well, it is, but the XXXXXX is also _always_ 
> searched.
> Without the suggested note, it can be confusing while testing or 
> setting up,
> also, if the XXXXXX is some remote service, this can create some hard 
> to find
> delays.
>
> Thanks,
>
> peter
>> It looks like the change only arrived in glibc 2.14. Would you be able
>> to take a look there?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Peter Schiffer]

ping

On 05/30/2012 11:22 AM, Peter Schiffer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've updated the patch against the latest man-pages 3.41.
> Also, I've added description of the initgroups database,
> reformulated the note and moved it to the return action.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks,
>
> peter
>
>
> --- nsswitch.conf.5.org    2012-05-10 22:13:23.000000000 +0200
> +++ nsswitch.conf.5    2012-05-30 11:16:26.881542800 +0200
> @@ -59,6 +59,11 @@
>  .BR gethostbyname (3)
>  and related functions.
>  .TP
> +.B initgroups
> +Supplementary group access list, used by
> +.BR getgrouplist (3)
> +function.
> +.TP
>  .B netgroup
>  Network-wide list of hosts and users, used for access rules.
>  C libraries before glibc 2.1 supported netgroups only over NIS.
> @@ -241,6 +246,10 @@
>  .B return
>  Return a result now.
>  Do not call any further lookup functions.
> +However, for compatibility reasons, if this is the selected action
> +for the `group' database and the `notfound' status,
> +and the configuration file does not contain the `initgroups' line,
> +the next lookup function is always called, without affecting the 
> search result.
>  .TP
>  .B continue
>  Call the next lookup function.
>
>
> On 03/30/2012 09:17 AM, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>> Hello guys,
>>
>> thanks for looking into this. I am adding some notes below:
>>
>> On 03/30/2012 01:27 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>>> On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>    wrote:
>>>>>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am suggesting the following update of the "notfound" status on 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the 
>>>>>>> correct
>>>>>>> place
>>>>>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any 
>>>>>>> comments
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>> welcome.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I
>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also 
>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to 
>>>>>> add some
>>>>>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> use it.
>>>>> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
>>>>> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>> I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this 
>>>> effect in
>>>> grp/initgroups.c ?
>>> Follow Peter's URL.
>>>
>>>> I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest 
>>>> version
>>>> but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not 
>>>> witnessing
>>>> this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups line, and 
>>>> this
>>>> entry:
>>>>
>>>>     group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files
>>>>
>>>> ...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not 
>>>> contain
>>>> the group entry that I am searching for.
>>>>
>>>> So I don't concur with the suggested change ...
>> The result is always as expected, the added note should clarify how
>> the search is done. Important example would be like this:
>>
>> group:      files [!NOTFOUND=return] XXXXXX
>>
>> what means, according to the current text in the man page, that if the
>> result from "files" is either SUCCESS, UNAVAIL or TRYAGAIN, then,
>> it should be returned. Well, it is, but the XXXXXX is also _always_ 
>> searched.
>> Without the suggested note, it can be confusing while testing or 
>> setting up,
>> also, if the XXXXXX is some remote service, this can create some hard 
>> to find
>> delays.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> peter
>>> It looks like the change only arrived in glibc 2.14. Would you be able
>>> to take a look there?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Michael
> -- 
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [patch] nsswitch.conf.5: clarify the "notfound" status

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

Mark,

Would you have a chance to look at this?

Thanks,

Michael

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Peter Schiffer <pschiffe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> ping
>
>
> On 05/30/2012 11:22 AM, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've updated the patch against the latest man-pages 3.41.
>> Also, I've added description of the initgroups database,
>> reformulated the note and moved it to the return action.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> peter
>>
>>
>> --- nsswitch.conf.5.org    2012-05-10 22:13:23.000000000 +0200
>> +++ nsswitch.conf.5    2012-05-30 11:16:26.881542800 +0200
>> @@ -59,6 +59,11 @@
>>  .BR gethostbyname (3)
>>  and related functions.
>>  .TP
>> +.B initgroups
>> +Supplementary group access list, used by
>> +.BR getgrouplist (3)
>> +function.
>> +.TP
>>  .B netgroup
>>  Network-wide list of hosts and users, used for access rules.
>>  C libraries before glibc 2.1 supported netgroups only over NIS.
>> @@ -241,6 +246,10 @@
>>  .B return
>>  Return a result now.
>>  Do not call any further lookup functions.
>> +However, for compatibility reasons, if this is the selected action
>> +for the `group' database and the `notfound' status,
>> +and the configuration file does not contain the `initgroups' line,
>> +the next lookup function is always called, without affecting the search
>> result.
>>  .TP
>>  .B continue
>>  Call the next lookup function.
>>
>>
>> On 03/30/2012 09:17 AM, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello guys,
>>>
>>> thanks for looking into this. I am adding some notes below:
>>>
>>> On 03/30/2012 01:27 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 29/03/2012 19:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Mark R Bannister
>>>>>> <mark-/K+B3afwL8Jt0JrxVvvTASp2UmYkHbXO@public.gmane.org>    wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28/03/2012 19:27, Peter Schiffer wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am suggesting the following update of the "notfound" status on the
>>>>>>>> nsswitch.conf.5 man page. I am not 100% sure that this is the
>>>>>>>> correct
>>>>>>>> place
>>>>>>>> where this information on the man page should be placed. Any
>>>>>>>> comments
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> welcome.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did a rewrite of the nsswitch.conf man page in October last year:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.man/2366/match=nsswitch+conf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm still waiting for Michael to incorporate these changes.  May I
>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>> you send in a patch that is applied against this?  I would also
>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> if you're going to make reference to "initgroups" you'll need to add
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>> further description somewhere that explains what this is and when you
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking a little deeper at this, I'd like another set of eyes. Mark,
>>>>>> would you be able to review Peter's patch?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>> I can't find this comment in glibc myself, there's nothing to this
>>>>> effect in
>>>>> grp/initgroups.c ?
>>>>
>>>> Follow Peter's URL.
>>>>
>>>>> I've tested on a build with glibc 2.5 - admittedly not the latest
>>>>> version
>>>>> but it does feature the initgroups functionality - and I am not
>>>>> witnessing
>>>>> this behaviour.  My configuration file has no initgroups line, and this
>>>>> entry:
>>>>>
>>>>>     group: db [NOTFOUND=return] files
>>>>>
>>>>> ...always returns as expected if my /var/db/group.db file does not
>>>>> contain
>>>>> the group entry that I am searching for.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I don't concur with the suggested change ...
>>>
>>> The result is always as expected, the added note should clarify how
>>> the search is done. Important example would be like this:
>>>
>>> group:      files [!NOTFOUND=return] XXXXXX
>>>
>>> what means, according to the current text in the man page, that if the
>>> result from "files" is either SUCCESS, UNAVAIL or TRYAGAIN, then,
>>> it should be returned. Well, it is, but the XXXXXX is also _always_
>>> searched.
>>> Without the suggested note, it can be confusing while testing or setting
>>> up,
>>> also, if the XXXXXX is some remote service, this can create some hard to
>>> find
>>> delays.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> peter
>>>>
>>>> It looks like the change only arrived in glibc 2.14. Would you be able
>>>> to take a look there?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>



-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html