Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 07:47:32 -0500 From: slave-mike <slave-mike@rv1.dynip.com> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NSS and PAM (was Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static) Message-ID: <3FC89564.8030209@rv1.dynip.com> In-Reply-To: <20031129011334.GC88553@madman.celabo.org> References: <20031129011334.GC88553@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
why does /bin/sh need NSS support? Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > [Threading intentionally broken.] > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 01:16:25AM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > >>"Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> 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, -- --- I'm a UNIX Kinda Guy. My websites: http://slavepix.dyns.net/ http://jaxleather.dyns.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FC89564.8030209>