also sprach Derek Martin <code@pizzashack.org> [2006.06.23.0454 +0200]:
> My conclusion is that it seems from a security standpoint, and
> from an ease-of-administration standpoint, pam_console is the
> clear winner over both of the other proposed solutions. So yes,
> when I said pam_console was "nice", I meant it, and I stand by
> that. Have I missed something in my analysis? If I have, I would
> certainly like to learn what it is.
Go ahead then and use it. But please do not make statements about
Debian not meeting the requirements of seasoned Unix admins such as
yourself. We, as in Debian, are going one path with our system, and
while someone might well like to deviate, one thing you cannot say
is that we don't reason with every step we take.
> Based on the above analysis, I rather strongly disagree. In every
> way, pam_console seems up to the challenge, though it needs the
> enhancement I mentioned regarding killing user processes before it
> is truly ready.
Doesn't sound like a solution I'd want on my machines.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
sed -e '/^[when][coders]/!d' \
-e '/^...[discover].$/d' \
-e '/^..[real].[code]$/!d' \
/usr/share/dict/words
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)