[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 06:08:37PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 04:31:52PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> > Opinions?
> Either PAM modules should not be allowed to use shared libraries that
> use pthreads, or we need to make sure every application using PAM is
> linked against libpthread.
I have been wondering about the latter. Most direct users of the PAM
interfaces are either quite small or already threaded, I think. This might
almost agitate for forcing the issue by moving the PAM interfaces to
libpthread, or to a separate library that depends explicitly on libpthread!
However, doesn't libc code also call into the PAM stuff?
Main Index |
Thread Index |