Readers.conf: help needed (was: my distaste for readers.conf grows)

[Russ Allbery]

Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com> writes:
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000, Aidan Cully wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2000 at 01:20:09AM, Russ Allbery said:

>>> Aidan, could you check me on this?  I'm pretty sure that the following
>>> will do it:

>> It looks like it.  You might also be able to get away with getting rid
>> of the 'default: <FAIL>' line in the 'remote' section, and not
>> providing an 'access fail' block.  I think Panix took that approach...

> I don't think so, you need it for the "!<FAIL>" exception, don't you?

Apparently you can do away with that exception too and take advantage of
the fact that users: * won't match a failed auth group with no default but
the absence of a users: key will.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>