From owner-freebsd-standards Tue Jan 29 2:59:15 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from descent.robbins.dropbear.id.au (058.a.006.mel.iprimus.net.au [210.50.44.58]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 967F437B404 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 02:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: (from tim@localhost) by descent.robbins.dropbear.id.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g0TAx2503342 for freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 29 Jan 2002 21:59:02 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from tim) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 21:59:01 +1100 From: "Tim J. Robbins" To: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: newgrp Message-ID: <20020129215901.A3335@descent.robbins.dropbear.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Here's an implementation of newgrp I've written that attempts to conform to SUSV2: http://www.wiretapped.net/~fyre/freebsd/newgrp.tar.gz It does not use PAM for authentication, instead it does traditional authentication using /etc/group when it needs to. I don't think this is a problem since SUSV2 discourages using group passwords anyway. Is it worth the effort to make newgrp use PAM? Tim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message