Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491767 --- Comment #19 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-04-21 12:36:28 EDT --- I'm running whatever's in rawhide currently: selinux-policy-3.6.12-4.fc11.noarch selinux-policy-targeted-3.6.12-4.fc11.noarch Well, at least I've found that the caching works across reboots. After logging in with setenforce 0, I can reboot the machine (which resets selinux to enforcing) and still log in. But I can't resolve any other users. And indeed, stopping nscd does get things working, but of course nscd caches more than uid/gid lookups. BTW, do you know if this will cache autofs lookups as well? Finally, to packaging issues: You fixed the minor issues I had; personally I dont' care one way or the other about the /lib64/security/pam_ldap.so dependency. However, one issue concerns me: /lib64/libnss_ldap.so.2 /usr/lib64/libnss_ldap-264.so /usr/lib64/libnss_ldap.so /usr/lib64/libnss_ldap.so.2 This brings up a couple of issues: Does the library really need to live in the root directory? Generally we try not to install things there unless they're absolutely required that early in the boot process (or for recovery). I know it conveniently avoids a conflict in this case, but I'm wondering if it's just done that way because of the conflict or if there's another reason. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review