Is this part of the current pam distribution? >On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:11:24PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: >> 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). > >>From a vendor's perspective, pam_pwdb has one huge advantage which is >that it tries to detect where an account resides (passwd, shadow, nis). >AFAICT, with pam_unix you have to define this manually in the config file, >and there's no mixing of local and NIS accounts as with NIS compat >mode (the +::::: hack). > >pam_unix2 (by Torsten Kukuk) is actually much better because it emulates >the NSS search logic to detect where an account comes from, and uses >the appropriate mechanism to change it (the down side of it is that >you have to patch it for every new NSS flavor, but that's a different >story). > >Olaf >-- >Olaf Kirch | --- o --- Nous sommes du soleil we love when we play >okir@monad.swb.de | / | \ sol.dhoop.naytheet.ah kin.ir.samse.qurax >okir@caldera.de +-------------------- Why Not?! ----------------------- > UNIX, n.: Spanish manufacturer of fire extinguishers. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Pam-list@redhat.com >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list -- R. J. Goyette Argonne National Laboratory rjgoyette@anl.gov (630) 252-4328 http://www.pns.anl.gov
