I think you'll find you need to link -lpwdb with it.
(Is it imperative you use pam_pwdb?, couldn't you use pam_unix?)
Cheers
Andrew
"Tran, Canh" wrote:
>
> I wrote a file called pamcode.c where
>
> Pamcode.c
> #include <security/pam_appl.h>
> #include <security/pam_misc.h>
>
> .............................
> int retval;
> struct pam_conv conv = {
> misc_conv,
> NULL
> }
>
> retval = pam_start("check_user", username, &conv, &pamh);
> retval = pam_authenticate(pamh, 0);
> .............................
>
> On command line, if I create binary with command
> >> cc pam_code.c -lpam -lpam_misc -ldl
>
> Then, a.out is created and I can run it by ./a.out with no errors
> reported.
>
> However, if I try to build a library by having following line in
> makefile:
>
> Makefile
> ..................
> ld -G -dy -o libauthentication.so pam_code.o -lpam
> -lpam_misc -ldl
> ..................
>
> and then, having this library loaded into Java code as:
>
> javacode.java
> ......................................
> System.LoadLibrary("authentication");
> ......................................
>
> Then, at runtime, I get an error 28 "Module is unknown" (static
> libs) from somewhere inside pam_pwdb.so
>
> I've discovered that the dlopen() call in pam_pwdb.so is
> failing with this error "/lib/security/pam_pwdb.so: undefined
> symbol: pam_get_item".
>
> /lib/security/pam_pwdb.so exists. The /etc/pam.d/check_user file
> is
> a symbolic link to /etc/pam.d/passwd, and passwd works fine
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> However, if I change the makefile above to following:
> Makefile
> ..................
> ld -G -dy -o libauthentication.so pam_code.o
> /lib/security/pam_pwdb.so -lpam -lpam_misc -ldl
> ..................
>
> Essentially, symbolically linking the /lib/security/pam_pwdb.so to
> the libpam and libpammisc library,
> Then, everything's fine afterward (i.e: no runtime errors are
> reported, and I can make call from
> Java code.
>
> Any suggestion? Ideally, I prefer not to have
> /lib/security/pam_pwdb.so symbolically linked with the 2 pam libraries, but
> for now, that's the only way to make it work.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Canh.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Pam-list@redhat.com
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list
