On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 10:24 -0400, Louis-Dominique Dubeau wrote: > It makes sense somewhat. But with the KISS principle in mind - when you > want just the unshare, why not create a new module called pam_unshare, > which would just call unshare and not do anything else? I think we could > accept such module into Linux-PAM. I have no problem with this approach. I just do not know pam well enough to know whether this would have unforeseen consequences or not. What needs to be done to ensure the presence of pam_unshare in a future version of pam? Thanks, Louis _______________________________________________ Pam-list mailing list Pam-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list
