From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15372 invoked by alias); 17 Jun 2014 22:59:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 15360 invoked by uid 89); 17 Jun 2014 22:59:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp1-g21.free.fr Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (HELO smtp1-g21.free.fr) (212.27.42.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:59:18 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.11] (unknown [78.224.52.79]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 733B5940109; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:59:16 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) Subject: Re: gecos from AD? (was Re: timeout in LDAP access) From: Denis Excoffier In-Reply-To: <20140617103014.GP23700@calimero.vinschen.de> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 22:59:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8E2EDB1F-9A60-488B-929F-7E62C0808A3E@Denis-Excoffier.org> References: <20140617100011.GL23700@calimero.vinschen.de> <20140617103014.GP23700@calimero.vinschen.de> To: cygwin@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2014-06/txt/msg00247.txt.bz2 On 2014-06-17 12:30, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jun 17 12:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> On Jun 16 22:39, Denis Excoffier wrote: >>> Another (unrelated and less important) problem is that 'getent' >>> happily produces lines with some extra =91:=92, in particular when the >>> gecos field itself contains =91:=92. >>=20 >> Wow, that *is* important. All fields returned from the server have to >> get their colons converted to commas. I'll fix that. >=20 > While we're at it... do we really need the gecos info? Cygwin fills > out this field with the Windows username and SID info for internal > purposes, and then adds the gecos info from AD. However, it's just > informational and usually only used by the finger(1) tool. The gecos field from AD seems to be _prepended_ (not appended) to the username + SID. In any case, it may represent some information with high added value (like user real name or e-mail address, depending on local rules of course). I would not vote for removing it. Why is it so clear that the =91:=92 should be replaced by a comma? Here, we have situations where it contains something like =AB Owner: Albert Einstein =BB. An underscore could be more appropriat= e. There is something more important: i=92ve written in one of my previous messages that when =91:=92 occurs in gecos, the resulting =91passwd=92 file= under =91getent=92 will contain more =91:=92 than expected, but this is incorrect= . In fact (and i would like someone to try it), when =91:=92 is found within the gecos field, =91getent=92 does not show the last (homedir) field, and the count of =91:=92 is still correct. The problem might not be in getent a= fter all. Regards, Denis Excoffier. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple