getpwent bug?

[Jens Rehsack]

On 07/16/10 09:12, Ashish SHUKLA wrote:
> Jens Rehsack writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> I cached the entires - I rate setpwent as to dangerous.
>
> dangerous ? why ?

Because it modifies something - and I might not know the source.
getpwent(3) delivers entries from yp, too (or LDAP) etc. - and
when I call setpwent(3) for such an entry, what happens then?

Long explanation for: I do not know the consequences - and that's
why I rate it dangerous as workaround.

Jens