Date: Wed, 21 Aug 96 11:59 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens)
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org (Debian Development)
Patrick Weemeeuw writes:
> I would propose to go for shadow for 1.2.
> In the mean time, I will try to make a few applications PAM-aware,
> to wet my f
Patrick Weemeeuw writes:
> I would propose to go for shadow for 1.2.
> In the mean time, I will try to make a few applications PAM-aware,
> to wet my feet and to gain some insight about how simple or complex
> things are. After all, it's not a black or white thing, but we can
> PAMify application
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 96 08:19 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens)
Reply-To: Bruce Perens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Patrick Weemeeuw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The big question is: is PAM ready for integration in the distribution?
I agree that it sounds like a better way to do th
Patrick Weemeeuw writes:
> Thinking things over again, and considering that the shadow support
> for Debian is almost finished (as far as I know, only xdm and a few
> small utilities such as vipw have to be adapted for shadow support), I
The actual situation is that we have to make xdm and adduser
Patrick Weemeeuw writes:
> For general information, see http://www.redhat.com/linux-info/pam/
> and for Linux-PAM: http://gluon.physics.ucla.edu/~morgan/pam/
Got it. Thanks.
> But to answer your question in short: PAM (which stands for pluggable
> authentication modules) is an API that encapsula
From: Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 18:25:36 +0200 (MET DST)
[...]
What exactly does it offer that shadow doesn't?
For general information, see http://www.redhat.com/linux-info/pam/
and for Linux-PAM: http://gluon.physics.ucla.edu/~morgan/pam/
But to answe
Patrick Weemeeuw writes:
> I have the feeling that an awful lot of work is being duplicated here.
But then almost the complete work has already been done.
> All of the work being done to support shadow password files, will have
> to be done over again to support PAM. Also, IMHO the PAM framework
From: Patrick Weemeeuw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The big question is: is PAM ready for integration in the distribution?
I agree that it sounds like a better way to do the job. I think the
interested parties should decide together if they are able to deploy
it reasonably _soon_. I have started work on
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 96 19:14 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens)
Let's plan on having "shadow" be part of the base for 1.2 . We should thus
have the default "login" be aware of it, etc.
Thanks
Bruce
Is this the final decision of the project leader, or is
9 matches
Mail list logo
