Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 08:35:14 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: new NSS Message-ID: <200304171535.h3HFZEFs094589@strings.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <20030417144449.GA4530@madman.celabo.org> References: <20030417141133.GA4155@madman.celabo.org> <1050590195.76150.8.camel@owen1492.uf.corelab.com> <20030417144449.GA4530@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20030417144449.GA4530@madman.celabo.org>, Jacques A. Vidrine <nectar@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 09:36:35AM -0500, Craig Boston wrote: > > Out of curiosity, how do the staticly-linked binaries in /bin and /sbin > > handle this since they can't dlopen anything? Do users handled by > > dynamically-loaded NSS modules just show up as UIDs with no name in > > /bin/ls? > > Yep. > The following is a work-around: > > cd /usr/src/bin/ls > make clean > make NOSHARED=NO depend > make NOSHARED=NO > make NOSHARED=NO install You might want to look at how libpam handles this situation. In the static case, all of the known modules are linked into it statically. Then they are located and registered at runtime by means of a linker set. John -- John Polstra John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200304171535.h3HFZEFs094589>