Subject: Re: PAM
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <>
From: Greg A. Woods <>
List: current-users
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
be wrong.)

								Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098;            <>;           <>
Planix, Inc. <>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <>