Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 02:58:33 +0700 From: Max Khon <fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: new NSS Message-ID: <20030418025833.A97164@iclub.nsu.ru> In-Reply-To: <200304171944.h3HJi1jK095151@strings.polstra.com>; from jdp@polstra.com on Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 12:44:01PM -0700 References: <20030417141133.GA4155@madman.celabo.org> <20030417144449.GA4530@madman.celabo.org> <200304171535.h3HFZEFs094589@strings.polstra.com> <20030418014500.B94094@iclub.nsu.ru> <200304171944.h3HJi1jK095151@strings.polstra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
hi, there! On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 12:44:01PM -0700, John Polstra wrote: > > > You might want to look at how libpam handles this situation. In the > > > static case, all of the known modules are linked into it statically. > > > Then they are located and registered at runtime by means of a linker > > > set. > > > > statically linking pam_ldap to /bin/ls will be a nightmare :) > > True, but why would /bin/ls need anything from PAM at all? It > doesn't currently use PAM. sorry, I mean nss_ldap, of course /fjoe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030418025833.A97164>