Thanks to the following:
Craig I. Hagan <hagan_at_ttgi.com>
Mike Iglesias <iglesias_at_draco.acs.uci.edu>
Selden E Ball Jr <SEB_at_LNS62.LNS.CORNELL.EDU>
Menelaos Karamichalis <mnk_at_wuerl.wustl.edu>
Eugene Chu <chu_at_musp0.Jpl.Nasa.Gov>
Dr. Thomas P. Blinn <tpb_at_zk3.dec.com>
Alan Rollow <alan_at_nabeth.cxo.dec.com>
David Warren <warren_at_atmos.washington.edu>
John Grosen <grosen_at_dilbert.cc.ndsu.nodak.edu>
Tero Kivinen <kivinen_at_niksula.hut.fi>
John P. Speno <speno_at_swarthmore.edu>
Vlado Pribolsan <priba_at_argos.tel.hr>
Suleyman Nazif Kutlu <Suleyman.Nazif.Kutlu_at_ege.edu.tr>
Kalle Korpela <kako_at_niksula.hut.fi>
Vikas Aggarwal <vikas_at_navya.com>
My original questions:
> 1.) Has anybody experienced in installing Cisco terminal servers on Alpha
> systems running TACACS (under enhanced security)?
I have downloaded the source code for the XTACACS at this site:
ftp://ftp.navya.com/pub/vikas/xtacacsd-3.5.shar.gz
I have tried to install it (on an OSF/1 v2.0b) and I have encountered
the following error message below:
------------(start of error message)-------------------------
OSF1 / $ make
Making for OSF1 V2.0
OS_CFLAGS= -DDECOSF and OS_LIBS=
cc -c -g -DDEBUG -DLOG_FACILITY="LOG_LOCAL6"
-DWTMP=\"/var/xtacacs/wtmp\" -D
UTMP=\"/var/xtacacs/utmp\" -DDECOSF -DCHAP_SUPPORT Getpw.c
/usr/lib/cmplrs/cc/cfe: Error: Getpw.c, line 149: 'pw_comment' undefined,
reoccurrences will not be reported
pwp.pw_comment = "";
-------^
/usr/lib/cmplrs/cc/cfe: Error: Getpw.c, line 149: member of structure or
union required
pwp.pw_comment = "";
--------^
*** Exit 1
Stop.
*** Exit 1
Stop.
-----------------------(end of error message)---------------
Attached below is the "hacked" /usr/include/pwd.h that is expected to
work on the OSF/1 v2.0
------------------(start of /usr/include/pwd.h)---------------------
/*
* Copyright (c) 1988 The Regents of the University of California.
* All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted
* provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
* duplicated in all such forms and that any documentation,
* advertising materials, and other materials related to such
* distribution and use acknowledge that the software was developed
* by the University of California, Berkeley. The name of the
* University may not be used to endorse or promote products derived
* from this software without specific prior written permission.
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED ``AS IS'' AND WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR
* IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED
* WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
*
* _at_(#)pwd.h 4.3 (Berkeley) 2/22/89
*/
#define _PATH_PASSWD "/etc/passwd"
#define _PATH_MASTERPASSWD "/etc/master.passwd"
#define _PATH_MKPASSWD "/etc/mkpasswd"
#define _PATH_PTMP "/etc/ptmp"
#define _PW_KEYBYNAME '0'
#define _PW_KEYBYUID '1'
struct passwd {
char *pw_name; /* user name */
char *pw_passwd; /* encrypted password */
int pw_uid; /* user uid */
int pw_gid; /* user gid */
long pw_change; /* password change time */
char *pw_class; /* user access class */
char *pw_gecos; /* Honeywell login info */
char *pw_dir; /* home directory */
char *pw_shell; /* default shell */
long pw_expire; /* account expiration */
char *pw_comment;
};
struct passwd *getpwent(), *getpwuid(), *getpwnam();
void endpwent(), setpwfile();
int setpassent(), setpwent();
-------------------(end of /usr/include/pwd.h file)----------------------
As of the moment, some of the respondents claimed/confirmed that the
XTACACS was successfully compiled at the later versions with enhanced
security installed on the system.
I have not installed it yet with enhanced security feature running
considering that I am still waiting for the installation media for the
3.2D or even the 4.0 (as an OS upgrade).
> 2.) Can old user licenses of the DEC OSF/1 ver. 2.0b be also used for the
> newer Digital UNIX 3.2c?
PAKS are not specific to a version of the operating system. So far as they
are concerned, OSF/1 = Digital Unix. What matters is the expiration date
built into them.
Dr. Thomas P. Blinn explains:
----------------------------
Digital UNIX "user" licenses are not version specific. The license PAKs
can be used with any version of Digital UNIX (but only to represent the
valid, licensed use -- that is, the rules of the original license along
with any restrictions apply). In fact, your "old" LMF database from the
V2.0b system could be restored from backup onto your V3.2C system and it
would work (unless it contains licenses that have expired, but they did
not work on the V2.0B system either).
Alan Rollow supplements it more:
-------------------------------
To the best of my knowledge (internally available licenses), license units
are related to system capacity, not version. So, a license purchased for
a particular system should work from V2.0 to V3.2C, but moving the license
to a larger system may not provide enough units (a DEC 3000 to DEC 8400).
Bonn
:)
Received on Sat Feb 03 1996 - 20:40:29 NZDT