On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Rick Goyette wrote: > So you use pam_unix instead of pam_pwdb? Is there any practical > difference in behavior between the two? Well, you've already seen that pam_unix works for you, and pam_pwdb doesn't. :) Other differences between the two: * pam_pwdb depends on libpwdb, which doesn't appear to be actively maintained * pam_pwdb is very inefficient, making it unsuitable for use with large password files * libpwdb has its own configuration file, separate from the config for PAM and NSS. This has caused many a problem for people who don't know about this other config file (and it's not particularly well-documented). So all in all, it's better to use pam_unix than pam_pwdb in most cases (assuming you have a recent version of Linux-PAM). Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
