Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:46:47 +0000
From:      Dominic Mitchell <dom@semantico.com>
To:        Roelof Osinga <roelof@nisser.com>
Cc:        Bjoern Fischer <bfischer@Techfak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   PAM (was: Re: MAIL set by whom?)
Message-ID:  <20010122094647.A7853@semantico.com>
In-Reply-To: <3A6B042E.659C716D@nisser.com>
References:  <3A6A50F3.307C9E06@nisser.com> <20010121103324.A297@frolic.no-support.loc> <3A6B042E.659C716D@nisser.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 21, 2001 at 04:45:50PM +0100, Roelof Osinga wrote:
> Grand gesture. Laudable even. Yeah, that PAM sure seems to've
> become popular. The Courier IMAP port also insisted upon its
> installation. Insisted in that fiddling with the makefile only
> resulted in failure to configure. But that's a whole different
> story.

Would it be a good idea to start using /etc/pam.d ala RedHat, instead of
the monolithic /etc/pam.conf?

As far as I can see the support is already there, it's just not being
used due to the presence of the /etc/pam.conf.

This would make installing PAM entries far easier for the ports.

-Dom


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010122094647.A7853>