Paul Goyette wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 netbsd99@sudog.com wrote:
> 
> > I would like to make a suggestion for those who are anti-PAM ...
> 
> I would like to make a suggestion for those who are pro-PAM!  ...
> 
> Why not go ahead and implement PAM, and have a completely default
> installation work _just_like_ the old, pre-PAM installs do, nsswitch
> and all?
> 
> I really don't care about PAM one way or the other, but the old method
> nsswitch works just fine for me.  Please don't make me have to learn a
> whole new (and apparently, rather convoluted and not necessarily self-
> consistent) configuration mechanism just to stay with what I already
> have and understand.

You wish. What will most likely happen is every system binary which
needs authentication will contain PAM library code.