On Wed, 17 Mar 1999 seebs@plethora.net wrote:

# In message <199903171708.JAA10623@Cup.DSG.Stanford.EDU>, Jonathan Stone writes:
# >Probably not. But there's also considerable interest in PAM, so you'd
# >want to copy/port/reimplement something that allowed PAM modules as
# >well.  then there's the fight over which is `more primitive': do PAM
# >modules get plugged in via the BSDI-style login.conf, or vice-versa?
# 
# Uh-huh.  I'd probably prefer to have the default behavior be login.conf,
# but if people want to plug themselves into PAM modules, they'd probably
# be able to. 

	I don't think PAM and the parts of login.conf that you seem
interested in are related, actually.  It would make sense to get all of
the stuff you wanted in to a login.conf for setting limits, etc... and
getting PAM in for doing authentication as two seperate projects.

--
SA, beyond.com           My girlfriend asked me which one I like better.
pub  1024/3CAE01D5 1994/11/03 Dustin Sallings <dustin@spy.net>
|    Key fingerprint =  87 02 57 08 02 D0 DA D6  C8 0F 3E 65 51 98 D8 BE 
L_______________________ I hope the answer won't upset her. ____________