Hello, On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 06:03:12PM -0700, shaul Karl wrote: > For the record, http://bugs.debian.org/474291 claims > that include is not equivalent to @include. Since I > don't know what the differences are, I can't comment > on the assertion below about the equivalence for all > the stacks and not bringing anything new or really > useful. The syntax for include and @include differ. In a /etc/pam.d file, the syntax of a line is: <type> <control> <module-path> <module-arguments> include is used as a <control> @include is used as a <type> Then the semantic is also different: include: include all lines of given type from the configuration file specified as an argument to this control. @include: parse a given file at the given location of the /etc/pam.d file -- Nekral _______________________________________________ Pam-list mailing list Pam-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list
