Re: PAM in 2.0? (was: PAM support in Samba)
On Wed, Oct 22, 1997 at 08:29:59AM -0400, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
> Another thing that should be injected here is the issue of other
> architectures. For some reason (yet to be determined), any type of
> PAM-based authentication fails miserably on the Alpha right now under
> Debian. It compiles cleanly, but fails to even revert back to standard
> authentication styles. From the looks of RedHat's AXP mailing list,
> they've had spotty results with PAM and Alphas also.
>
> I have no clue what other problems might or might not exist on other
> architectures like PPC or Sparc (any status report has slipped by me
> somehow).
This is a very valid point. Is it perhaps possible with the current PAM code
to make a "dummy" PAM library (i.e. hardwired to use the standard
authentication method in a straightforward fashion)? Then the non-x86
architectures could compile from the same source, and their applications
would become PAM-aware as soon as the trouble with the PAM library was
fixed.
> My personal feeling is that PAM should be a goal, but not a requirement
> for 2.0 release.
I agree. But it would be nice to get a move to PAM started now.
Ray
--
LEADERSHIP A form of self-preservation exhibited by people with auto-
destructive imaginations in order to ensure that when it comes to the crunch
it'll be someone else's bones which go crack and not their own.
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: