Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Ladislav Hagara <hgr AT vabo.cz>]

Thank you.
And why does not sshd have its own group sshd ?
Why group nogroup ?
For example Mandrake uses group sshd too.
- lace -

> This was fixed last night (hmm did I remember to close the bug?). The
> fix is to  comment out line 41 of libgrimoire and add the line
> 'nogroup:65534:' to /etc/sorcery/groups.
>
> On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 04:56, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > Sorcery team, please, could you  modify /etc/sorcery/accounts and
> > /etc/sorcery/groups according to
> > http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2129#c3
> >
> > I installed latest iso http://download.sourcemage.org/iso/ :
> > /etc/sorcery/accounts contains sshd:111:65534
> > /etc/group contains nogroup with 65534
> > /etc/sorcery/groups contains sudo:111:
> >
> > My suggestion:
> > /etc/sorcery/accounts could contains sshd:111:111
> > /etc/sorcery/groups could be modified, I would added group sshd:111:
> > and modify group sudo:111: to for example sudo:114:
> >
> > Why does sshd use nogroup? I think sshd could have its own group sshd.
> > Or modify create_account function to ignore nogroup in /etc/passwd.