5.1 beta2 still in trouble with pam_ldap

[Ruslan Ermilov]

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:24:34AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov <ru at freebsd.org> writes:
> > On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 01:45:44AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Gordon Tetlow <gordont at gnf.org> writes:
> > > > I'm unfamiliar with ["binding"]. What's it do?
> > > It behaves like "sufficient" should, i.e. failure is not ignored.
> > You mean, _last_ failure is not ignored?
> 
> I don't understand the question.
> 
In a chain with mutiple "binding" modules, only the _last_
failure gets ignored?  Meaning, if some other module succeeds,
override the failure status, right?


Cheers,
-- 
Ruslan Ermilov		Sysadmin and DBA,
ru at sunbay.com		Sunbay Software AG,
ru at FreeBSD.org		FreeBSD committer,
+380.652.512.251	Simferopol, Ukraine

http://www.FreeBSD.org	The Power To Serve
http://www.oracle.com	Enabling The Information Age
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20030523/d3e58373/attachment.bin