From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Apr 11 17:24:18 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA02435
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 17:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from caliban.dihelix.com (caliban.dihelix.com [198.180.136.138])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id RAA02412;
          Fri, 11 Apr 1997 17:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from langfod@localhost) by caliban.dihelix.com (8.8.5/8.8.3) id OAA01332; Fri, 11 Apr 1997 14:22:44 -1000 (HST)
Message-Id: <199704120022.OAA01332@caliban.dihelix.com>
Subject: Re: longer usernames
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.95.970411161150.579a-100000@haven.uniserve.com> from Tom Samplonius at "Apr 11, 97 04:13:32 pm"
To: tom@uniserve.com (Tom Samplonius)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 1997 14:22:44 -1000 (HST)
Cc: langfod@dihelix.com, bradley@dunn.org, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG,
        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
From: "David Langford" <langfod@dihelix.com>
X-blank-line: This space intentionaly left blank.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Tom Samplonius
>
>On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, David Langford wrote:
>
>> This is great. This is the first time I have seen anyone actually
>> say whether or not FreeBSD to FreeBSD NIS may work.
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> -David Langford
>>  langfod@dihelix.com
>
>  Huh?  Why not?  FreeBSD NIS is great:
>
>Tom

Whoops, no the confusion was whether or not FreeBSD to FreeBSD NIS would
work with long user names.

In the past discusions it had usually been mentioned that NIS and long
user names would cause problems  but it was never clear if this was
also the cause in homogenious environments.

:)

-David Langford
 langfod@dihelix.com