Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 18:58:10 -0800 (PST) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/login Makefile login.c Message-ID: <XFMail.981111185810.jdp@polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9811111240160.23538-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11-Nov-98 John Fieber wrote:
> Some time back I was hunting for some PAM modules for Solaris and
> I discovered a variety of gratuitious differences between the
> Solaris and Linux PAM APIs. I didn't dig into who was at fault
> for these differences but am now wondering which FreeBSD's PAM be
> most compatible with (if either, or both).
The PAM I'm bringing in is Linux PAM, ported to FreeBSD and
contribified, with significant portions (e.g., all the modules)
left unused. The modules tend not to port too well, due to system
dependencies. In my experience, they also tend to have the worst
code. I suppose that's because somebody hacked each one out to
scratch some immediate itch.
There are some ifdefs in the include files that seem to attempt to
deal with the Solaris differences. I can't say how effective they
are. Since any free modules we find in source form are likely to be
for Linux rather than Solaris, I think that's the better API to use if
there are significant differences.
Note, we can expect most foreign modules are going to require some
porting regardless. Most (but not all) authentication-related code
tends to depend on system-specific things.
John
---
John Polstra jdp@polstra.com
John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public."
-- H. L. Mencken
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.981111185810.jdp>