From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 28 17:13:36 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 5169716A4CE for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:13:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D55F43F75 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:13:35 -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 E170754883; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:13:34 -0600 (CST) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7FAF66D455; Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:13:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:13:34 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Dag-Erling Smørgrav Message-ID: <20031129011334.GC88553@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , Dag-Erling Smørgrav , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-In-Reply-To: X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1 cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: NSS and PAM (was Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static) 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: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:13:36 -0000 [Threading intentionally broken.] On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 01:16:25AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > "Jacques A. Vidrine" writes: > > NSS and PAM do not overlap. They are complimentary and one cannot do > > the job of the other. > > That is a bug in NSS, PAM or both. Interesting. Explain, please. (Maybe privately or in another thread; hate to keep this'n going.) Perhaps you mean that it is a design flaw that two APIs are required. If so, I happen to disagree; I think that the separation of directory services and authentication is appropriate and necessary. > (BTW, I think you mean that they are complementary, not complimentary, > although it is certainly true that some implementations of NSS and PAM > are free) heh, Yes, that's a spell-o from which spell-check could not save me. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se