From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Feb 22 16: 0:17 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (rwcrmhc53.attbi.com [204.127.198.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F2737B400; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:00:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8]) by rwcrmhc53.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020223000013.DDDK2951.rwcrmhc53.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 00:00:13 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA75518; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:44:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 15:44:38 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Chris Costello , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: OpenPAM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 23 Feb 2002, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Julian Elischer writes: > > 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? can a > > linux_pam module be used (once compiled for FreeBSD) on a FreeBSD system? > > how much work is it to convert the source for a Linux Pam module to a > > BSD-PAM module? > > Did you look at the diffs? > > > The deliberatly gave the Linux-poam stuff a BSD copyright originally > > to allow us to use it.. WHy does it need to be rewritten? > > Because it sucks rocks, it's a nightmare to debug, it has a very slow > release cycle, and maintainer response to bug reports is haphazard. That's fair enough then My question was "why?" Not a statement that it was a bad idea or anything.. > > DES > -- > Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message