Subject: Re: port-i386/33974
To: None <port-i386-maintainer@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,>
From: Matthias Drochner <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de>
List: netbsd-bugs
Date: 07/11/2006 21:05:03
The following reply was made to PR port-i386/33974; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Matthias Drochner <M.Drochner@fz-juelich.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: port-i386-maintainer@NetBSD.org, gnats-admin@NetBSD.org,
	netbsd-bugs@NetBSD.org, elekktretterr@exemail.com.au
Subject: Re: port-i386/33974 
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:02:47 +0200

 elekktretterr@exemail.com.au said:
 > Approximately 50 users in a group.
 
 This might fit my suspicion. The buffer is 1024 bytes iirc,
 20 bytes per user looks reasonable.
 (I've sized the buffer after code in libc for files/yp;
 the usage pattern might be different for ldap.)
 
 > would a ktrace be of any use to you?
 
 Probably not. This is a userland issue.
 To protect against this kind of problems I'd like to
 make the buffer sizing dynamical. (Some upper limit would
 still be needed to protect against rogue LDAP servers, but
 making the default size too high would be bad for applications
 which try to lock their image into memory. ntpd comes to mind.)
 For this, it would be helpful to know what error messages the
 PADL supplied library issues in that case. (I hope it is the
 TRYAGAIN thing.)
 So just a printf within the getgrnam and the getgrgid calls
 (to begin with) within files/netbsd.c, telling the return code
 if the underlying library, could help.
 
 best regards
 Matthias