Subject: Re: RFC: migration to a fully dynamically linked system
To: sudog <>
From: Matthias Buelow <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 12/21/2001 18:31:02
sudog writes:

>PAM is a raging, stinking, rotting, festering pile of burning garbage and 
>has been so in the implementations I've seen. (About three so far.) Search 
>the mail list archives (via google, the normal NetBSD archive search 
>mechanism is dead, looks like) for PAM and you'll see how some others view 
>it as well.

Basically I don't care how it's called or how it works but if I
cannot make the system adapt to various authentication sources
easily, it is certainly a big minus.  At one site, we inted to move
everything away from NIS and over to LDAP.  If NetBSD can't easily
adapt to it, it will be replaced by something that can, as easy as
that.  Yet one should consider that PAM is a de-facto standard now
(although I don't know how much the different implementations are
compatible with Sun's) before inventing something else that's
entirely incompatible.