Subject: Re: PAM
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/28/2002 18:43:02
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002, Bill Studenmund wrote:
# This doesn't mean we plan on repeating the mistakes we think other PAM
# implementations make.
Hmm... I missed that note earlier.
What does this mean for some commercial PAM module supplier? Does it
mean they'll likely have to provide NetBSD-specific object modules?
(Nobody commented on my earlier related question about whether existing
implementations today could share object modules between identical CPUs
running a different underlying OS and libc, etc. I doubt it, but I may
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Planix, Inc. <email@example.com>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <firstname.lastname@example.org>