From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May 22 23:29:03 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7254937B401
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 23:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from whale.sunbay.crimea.ua (whale.sunbay.crimea.ua
	[212.110.138.65])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48AF43FAF
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 22 May 2003 23:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from ru@whale.sunbay.crimea.ua)
Received: from whale.sunbay.crimea.ua (ru@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	h4N6SnEd022387
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Fri, 23 May 2003 09:28:49 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from ru@whale.sunbay.crimea.ua)
Received: (from ru@localhost)
	by whale.sunbay.crimea.ua (8.12.9/8.12.8/Submit) id h4N6Sm8q022382;
	Fri, 23 May 2003 09:28:48 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from ru)
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 09:28:48 +0300
From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>
To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Message-ID: <20030523062848.GG17107@sunbay.com>
References: <20030522184631.A23366@bart.esiee.fr>
	<xzp65o2zkhf.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030522224850.GK87863@roark.gnf.org>
	<xzpof1uy28n.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030523060846.GC17107@sunbay.com>
	<xzp4r3mxjrx.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RMedoP2+Pr6Rq0N2"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <xzp4r3mxjrx.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: Frank Bonnet <bonnetf@bart.esiee.fr>
Subject: Re: 5.1 beta2 still in trouble with pam_ldap
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 06:29:03 -0000


--RMedoP2+Pr6Rq0N2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:24:34AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> writes:
> > On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:45:44AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Gordon Tetlow <gordont@gnf.org> writes:
> > > > I'm unfamiliar with ["binding"]. What's it do?
> > > It behaves like "sufficient" should, i.e. failure is not ignored.
> > You mean, _last_ failure is not ignored?
>=20
> I don't understand the question.
>=20
In a chain with mutiple "binding" modules, only the _last_
failure gets ignored?  Meaning, if some other module succeeds,
override the failure status, right?


Cheers,
--=20
Ruslan Ermilov		Sysadmin and DBA,
ru@sunbay.com		Sunbay Software AG,
ru@FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251	Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org	The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com	Enabling The Information Age

--RMedoP2+Pr6Rq0N2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE+zb+gUkv4P6juNwoRAsMGAJ4lyAzfIXJvpUzInZg4RL/Ir7UtjgCeIvxd
XF5K7e4Uld1EMcxDWpbEtS0=
=b9IC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--RMedoP2+Pr6Rq0N2--