Chris Jaeger wrote: > > Chris Jaeger wrote: > > Yes, I am aware of this. However, as I am dealing with several > > applications that may suffer from this problem, and I have had some > > difficulty contacting maintainers, I would prefer to solve it in fewer > > patches if possible. > > > > Replying to my own post... Perhaps I can solve this in 0 > patches. What are the reasons one would or wouldn't use pam_pwdb > instead of pam_unix? Never mind... I looked this up on deja... Regards, Chris
