On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Joseph Mallett wrote:

> > The idea of making it something based on login class would be good, but
> > more work.
> 
> I suppose the 'more work' reason shouldn'y fly though. If there's
> extensive support for login class-related stuff at lower levels, then in
> the future, similar problems like this could be solved easier, and of
> course, we'd have the continual use of a centralised thing like login
> classes to control this.

Are you in a position to work on getting login class-related support
written? While I agree that it'd be cool, if we don't have someone who can
get it written soon, I think it'd be fine to add this sysctl - while not
the best step we can think of, the sysctl isn't a bad step. :-)

Take care,

Bill