From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jan 22 2: 7:39 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from pcwin002.win.tue.nl (pcwin002.win.tue.nl [131.155.71.72]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7F137B404; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 02:07:12 -0800 (PST) Received: (from stijn@localhost) by pcwin002.win.tue.nl (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f0MA6x970885; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:06:59 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from stijn) Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 11:06:59 +0100 From: Stijn Hoop To: Dominic Mitchell Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PAM (was: Re: MAIL set by whom?) Message-ID: <20010122110659.F70055@pcwin002.win.tue.nl> References: <3A6A50F3.307C9E06@nisser.com> <20010121103324.A297@frolic.no-support.loc> <3A6B042E.659C716D@nisser.com> <20010122094647.A7853@semantico.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20010122094647.A7853@semantico.com>; from dom@semantico.com on Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 09:46:47AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 09:46:47AM +0000, Dominic Mitchell wrote: > Would it be a good idea to start using /etc/pam.d ala RedHat, instead of > the monolithic /etc/pam.conf? > > As far as I can see the support is already there, it's just not being > used due to the presence of the /etc/pam.conf. > > This would make installing PAM entries far easier for the ports. Seconded. I don't see any reason *not* to do it this way. OTOH, ports are not supposed to install in /etc, so the best way would be to extend pam to support /usr/local/etc/pam.d *and* /etc/pam.d (if it doesn't already do this). No, I'm not sending patches, sorry :) --Stijn -- Nostalgia ain't what it used to be. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message