On Tue, 08 Aug 2000, Richard Michael wrote: > > > > > > (1) http://cvsweb.linuxdoc.org/index.cgi/pam > > > > > > > This stuff I made for our distro (see http://www.pld.org.pl). Linuxdoc > > is a coincidence as we host their CVS :) > > Ok, so unless I'm going (a) use your distro or (b) want to work out the > potential Redhatisms w/ these sources, I should stay away from them? In > the event that I use these sources - are they being maintained? Yes (pam_console has some "features" removed for example). Yes. > I'd like > to stay on track with the sources that are being developed with reasonable > frequency. > > > > > > (2) http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/Linux-PAM/?cvsroot=pam > > > > > > > You will find skey rpms on ftp.pld.org.pl, they have all that is required > > to compile pam_skey. And if you want there are also binary rpms with > > pam_skey only (pam-pam_skey-*.rpm). Or you can just grab source rpm, > > rebuild and see if it works ;) > > Ok thanks. I'm going to look at pam_skey.c from the PLD dist. > > However, I'm wondering, why isn't there an SKEY module (or OPIE module) on > the sourceforge CVS? Weren't your PLD mods folded into the main development? That's for Andrew to decide, If he accept pam_skey and pam_opie I can commit them to sourceforge repository. > What are people on the sourceforge tree doing for SKEY authentication? > > Not being much of a coder, I'm concerned about adding the pam_skey.c module > from the PLD tree. Your feeling is that it should be possible, with minimal > tweaking (and the tweaking won't cause any real problems) ? If you only add pam_skey module there should be no problems. Jan -- Jan Rękorajski | ALL SUSPECTS ARE GUILTY. PERIOD! baggins<at>mimuw.edu.pl | OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T BE SUSPECTS, WOULD THEY? BOFH, type MANIAC | -- TROOPS by Kevin Rubio
