Re: [PAM] Should `ssh' depend on `libpwdb'?
- To: "Karl M. Hegbloom" <email@example.com>
- Cc: "Debian Developers' Forum" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [PAM] Should `ssh' depend on `libpwdb'?
- From: Torsten Landschoff <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 11:31:18 +0200
- Message-id: <19990601113117.C27417@wormhole.galaxy>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; from Karl M. Hegbloom on Mon, May 31, 1999 at 08:12:33PM +0000
- References: <email@example.com>
On Mon, May 31, 1999 at 08:12:33PM +0000, Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> I think I remember reading in one of these mailing lists that the PAM
> `libpwdb' is deprecated, and should not be used, since it bypasses the
> normal "nsswitch" mechanism in glibc. Is this true?
AFAIR yes. And why would a program depend directly on libpwdb? It should be
wrapped through PAM, shouldn't it?
> I tried to uninstall it, but found that `ssh' and `ssh2' depend on it.
> Shouldn't they be configured to use the normal "unix" auth plugins?
> Is this a "bug" against `ssh' and `ssh2'? (Should I file it?)
I would say so. IIRC Ben Collins has taken maintainership of libpam. He should