Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 16:52:03 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Scott Mitchell <scott.mitchell@mail.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PAM, setusercontext, kdm and ports/32273 Message-ID: <3C534F33.2755EED9@mindspring.com> References: <20020126224243.A72777@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Mitchell wrote: > However, this got me thinking -- is the right solution here to have a PAM > module that does the setusercontext(), so programs that already know about > PAM will just work, without needing to know about setusercontext() as well? > I can see that causing problems with programs (login, xdm, etc.) that > already understand both mechanisms, but they could always not use this > hypothetical pam_setusercontext module, right? > > So, is this a worthwhile thing to have? I'm happy to either write the PAM > module or fix kdm, but I'd rather not waste my time learning about PAM > internals if people think this would be a pointless exercise. No. THis is a bad idea. Fix KDM instead. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C534F33.2755EED9>