Subject: Re: bin/32903: utmp remains empty
To: None <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/13/2006 00:16:21
> > it is not helping resolve anything to say:
> > "modifying any script or file on a NetBSD system voids
> > any and all operational guarantees".
> > if this is the case, no one would be deserving of reporting
> > a problem - because everyone modifies configuration files.
> As far as I know, NetBSD has no operational guarantees in the first
it was suggested that not modifying anything [much] in /etc would
result in "login" making utmp entries. the "operational guarantee"
was implied in that statement.
> But you're not modifying configuration files; you're making more
> significant changes.
this is a vague statement. what is "significant"?
> And reporting problems is fine, but you hould be more forthcoming about
> changes you've made to the standard system.
this is vague as well. what is "more forthcoming"?
> As it stands, I have no idea how your custom /etc looks, so I don't know how
> I can help.
i never knew how anyone's /etc looked either,
yet i helped many people in the past.
> I'm also puzzled as to your belief that it was somehow a problem with the
> NetBSD source, rather than looking at your changes first.
I MADE NO CHANGES. i stated many times:
i use the SAME /etc that i used with the 2.x series.
> Anyways, I already suggested that you check your PAM configuration, which is
> stored in /etc, but you've been more interested in trying to explain how
> it's NetBSD's problem, rather than actually trying the things I suggested.
this was not suggested to the best of my knowledge, and
furthermore, i do not see how it is relevant. PAM is
calling the unix login just fine. as i said, /usr/bin/login
is not making the correct utmp entries. i can run it directly.
> > just because it strikes as a bad idea,
> > doesn't mean it is a bad idea. i can
> > use the same /etc on a Linux system
> > as well - bringing up a BSD/Linux
> > system is a simple and generic process
> > and can be done with 20 simple shell lines
> > for most any system.
> Well good luck with that then.
none of these type of statements
is is helpful in exacting the problem.
they are not technical or knowledgeable.
i could get the same response from a
person that had very little knowledge
in UNIX type systems, or someone that
rarely, if ever, used NetBSD before.