Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4600 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] NIS, NIS+, Automount which combinations work
  • From: "Steven T. Hatton" <hattons@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:16:56 -0500
  • Message-id: <200401301616.56847.hattons@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Friday 30 January 2004 15:44, Dylan wrote:
> On Friday 30 January 2004 20:03 pm, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
> It doesn't. but works well with it. It may be a dependency, but
> automount (actually autofs) is independent of NIS.
All I know is that when I had NIS installed and configured, I could
cd /net/<hostname?>/directory/path, but that stopped working when I blew away
the NIS configuration.

> If you are thinking
> of using it then I'd reccomend getting the latest autofs4 from
There was a time I always built my own kernel, but it started requiring
thought, and that was more than I could handle. I hope that is bundled in
the eagerly awaited 2.6.x kernel rpms from SuSE. My last try resulted in no
network connection, so I rolled back.

> NIS+ is only available as a client - SFAIK there is no Linux server for
> it, only a Solaris one. Can't say any more about it that that...

I /believe/ yp is actually NIS+.
> NIS works well, but you may need to hack the makefile to get it to
> distribute non-standard autofs maps. I simply added the necessary
> sections for my setup and it worked fine. There is no encryption on the
> passwords, so it shouldn't be used on an open or untrusted network.

I recall looking at something in the SuSE distribution, late one night, over a
year ago that purported to be a means of using PKI (Primary Key
Infrastructure) and/or encryption with NIS/YP and/or NFS. All I recall
clearly is the package had the fingerprints of one of the SuSE old-timers all
over it, and it consisted of little more than C header files.

> Autofs3 doesn't (IME, YMMV) work well, especially with NIS. autofs4 (and
> I really do suggest getting the latest build) functions as described -
> I share all the autofs configs with NIS over 8 boxes without problems -

I don't believe I have had Autofs4 working, but as I say, it's been over a
year since I dug into this.

> NFS has some peculiarities - it doesn't co-exist well with reiserfs, no
> matter what people say about the problems being fixed. Security is
> basic to say the least, but if you configure it sensibly you should be
> safe on a closed network. It's not easy to get it running through NAT,
> to the extent that I wouldn't bother trying (again, YMMV.) Also, it's
> picky about whitespace in the /etc/exports file, and the file locking
> is not what it should be!

I do recall reading so sun documentation on NIS+/NFS and encryption, but that
was back in the 20th century.


It forces me to think... Oh wait, I said I didn't want to do that. ;-)
Actually, I'm taking a breather from learning to use SOAP and AXIS*, and
looking at the SuSE 9.0 book's networking sections.


BTW, if any of the Novell folks out there in Happy Valley are listening,
there are three requirements for any kind of network solution that involves
first level administrators or users directly. User interface, user interface
and user interface.

> Dylan


< Previous Next >
Follow Ups