From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Feb 22 15: 5: 0 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CACA037B402; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:04:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from pool0057.cvx40-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([216.244.42.57] helo=mindspring.com) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16eOkI-0006fH-00; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:04:55 -0800 Message-ID: <3C76CE8D.1660973B@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:04:45 -0800 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer Cc: Chris Costello , Dag-Erling Smorgrav , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenPAM References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Julian Elischer wrote: > 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? Yes. Pam is just an API. > can a linux_pam module be used (once compiled for FreeBSD) on a FreeBSD > system? Yes. > how much work is it to convert the source for a Linux Pam module to a > BSD-PAM module? Same as now; most of the time, it's just a recompile, unless there are unexpected Linux-isms in the code to hamper it being portable between UNIX systems. > The deliberatly gave the Linux-poam stuff a BSD copyright originally > to allow us to use it.. WHy does it need to be rewritten? I'll let DES answer that one... though have you looked at the Linux-PAM code? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message