Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:04:45 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Chris Costello <chris@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenPAM Message-ID: <3C76CE8D.1660973B@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202221439540.74100-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C76CE8D.1660973B>