Date: 23 Feb 2002 00:14:50 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Chris Costello <chris@FreeBSD.ORG>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenPAM Message-ID: <xzpbseh3y8l.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202221439540.74100-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202221439540.74100-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes: > The advantages to using linux_pam is obviously that we get to piggyback > off them for new kinds of pam modules etc. Is this still the case? can a > linux_pam module be used (once compiled for FreeBSD) on a FreeBSD system? > how much work is it to convert the source for a Linux Pam module to a > BSD-PAM module? Did you look at the diffs? > The deliberatly gave the Linux-poam stuff a BSD copyright originally > to allow us to use it.. WHy does it need to be rewritten? Because it sucks rocks, it's a nightmare to debug, it has a very slow release cycle, and maintainer response to bug reports is haphazard. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzpbseh3y8l.fsf>