From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 26 05:04:07 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBEE16A4CF for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 05:04:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C41D143F3F for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 05:04:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (verified OK)) by gw.celabo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D6E548A5; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:04:03 -0600 (CST) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 06E176D455; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:04:02 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:04:02 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Matthias Andree Message-ID: <20031126130402.GB57523@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , Matthias Andree , freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <20031125025621.453732A8FC@canning.wemm.org> <200311250311.hAP3BTCO075916@apollo.backplane.com> <20031125150700.GA48007@madman.celabo.org> <20031125201421.GB54467@madman.celabo.org> <200311252039.hAPKdBfq080963@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static (was: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:04:07 -0000 On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 02:00:08AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > Matthew Dillon writes: > > > How much do you intend to use NSS for? I mean, what's the point of > > adopting this cool infrastructure if all you are going to do with it > > is make a better PAM out of it? > > The important thing is that NSS allows to plug modules such as LDAP or > PostgreSQL for user base management. PAM is only halfway there and > doesn't give libc et al. a notion of a user or group context (in spite > of its "account" context), NSS does. One might discuss if PAM is really > needed with NSS in place, but it's hard to think of a system without > NSS and removing PAM now doesn't look right. NSS and PAM do not overlap. They are complimentary and one cannot do the job of the other. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se