On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Dan Melomedman wrote:

> Bill Studenmund wrote:
> > tokens, etc. Which is why we want to do PAM; you can layer BSD Auth (with
> > all of its functionality) on top of PAM while you can't layer all of PAM
> > on top of BSD Auth.
>
> Do most people need esoteric things like AFS tokens, or anything else
> which can't be done with PAM? Maybe the solution is to hack the special
> cases that PAM could do, separately from PAM, like AFS authentication.
> This way you don't impose features most people won't even need in the
> first place.

Huh? That didn't parse.

Do things that PAM could do, separately from PAM?? Why not just do them in
PAM?

Take care,

Bill