From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21289 invoked by alias); 21 Jul 2002 08:52:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 21282 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2002 08:52:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web21006.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.227.60) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jul 2002 08:52:35 -0000 Message-ID: <20020721085230.90004.qmail@web21006.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [216.215.132.53] by web21006.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 01:52:30 PDT Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 03:57:00 -0000 From: Nicholas Wourms Subject: Re: Cygwin Password handling and Inetd configuration To: Phil Smith , cygwin@cygwin.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg01598.txt.bz2 --- Phil Smith wrote: > Nicholas, > > It's great to get a quick reply, but it seems somewhat arrogant to > stated > "RTFM" I'm sure this is what anyone would have said if they even felt like responding. It would behoove you to read the following before posting: http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html > and that 1.3.11-3 is "old news" -- especially since the 1.3.12-1 > announcement says nothing about password or inetd fixes (perhaps this is > a > little joke ?) Yes, I HAVE read the documentation and the huge number of No, it isn't... Though if you'd care to do a search of the ml-archives, you'll see that when people report "problems" and are using out of date dll's, the first response is usually to update to the latest dll. Which, BTW, is 1.3.12-2 (not 1.3.12-1). This lack of attention to detail implies that you have not taken the time to properly research the issue. > problems other users have had getting "login", "in.telnetd" or "in.ftpd" > > working for various accounts -- Administrator, anonymous, Guest, etc. > > a) Much of the online documentation is out of date, and the recent (late > > July) recommendations for others to try options like "mkpasswd -u $USER" > > (also in http://cygwin.com/docs.html) aren't even supported, according > to > the utility. The -v option on mkpasswd reports it is tje current 1.20. Again, I mentioned the docs as a starting point. Most of the info in there is still relevant. You should asl try searching the mailing list archives. > b) I've got the CYGWIN variable set to "netd" on my NT4 system. I've > tried > an installation on Win2K with similar problems. Do you meant "ntsec"? Have you set the "ntsec" variable? If your filesystem is FAT, then try setting the "ntea" variable. This is, again, all in the docs. > c) I have home directories for all accounts, and done > "mkpassd -l > /etc/passwd" and "mkgroup -l > /etc/group" (these are the > same, incidentally as what the default setup created. See above. > d) Getting "clued in" as you say from the inetd documentation makes no > sense, considering that inetd itself DOES work. I noted that the there > is no > discussion of port mapping -- it does not cover this topic at all. It > seems > /etc/services just isn't supported. Of course, I can try looking at the > source code, but I was hoping that Red Hat or others in the Cygwin > community > could share more than "clues." Of course, you did try opening a find window and searching for the "services" file like I suggested? Obviously not. In case you weren't aware (as this is explained in the docs), Cygwin uses the windows winsock api to provide network services. Thus, you would need to edit the windows hosts, services, etc. to have a similar change in cygwin. (BTW, this was discussed just 2 days ago). > e) If the /bin/passwd manual isn't there, this is a bug. It should be > reconciled with openssl passwd. However, if NEITHER allows password > changing, that is a BIG TIME bug. I could live with this, but it seems > worse > that ALL defined NT user account passwords are being rejected by login, > telnet or ftp. Just because Cygwin doesn't operate within Phil's specified parameters, you deem it as a bug. However you: A)Haven't taken the time to properly research the issue. B)Refuse to upgrade to the latest dll. C)Haven't examined the source code and provided a patch to your bugs. The point is that all the "bugs" you described have been discussed in the past. More often than not, the bug lies in the user, not the code. > Serious help would still be appreciated. Maybe you should ask for a refund? > "Clueless" Phil. If the shoe fits... Cheers, Nicholas __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better http://health.yahoo.com -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/