[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: PPPD pammified?



On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Michael K. Johnson wrote:

> 
> Tom Diehl writes:
> >Is this the right answer (tm)? I thought that there was a pammified
> >version of pppd, although I do not know where. I am looking for it myself.
> >I will have to do a search for it later.
> 
> It is the correct answer.  It's not the Right Answer[tm].  :-)  The
> lack of a pamified pppd in RHL 4.2 is my fault.
> 
> However, the pamified pppd that I saw was pamified in a way that
> WILL NOT WORK with the version of PAM shipped with 4.2, because
> it violates the spec by setting PAM_AUTHTOK from the application
> side of the framework.

Ok, I want to recompile ppp to have shadow support. This requires
that the shadow package be installed. If I install that will it
mess with pam (or for that matter anything else)?

...................Tom
tdiehl@pil.net

"What a fool cannot learn he laughs at. Thinking that by his laughter 
he shows superority, instead of latent idiocy."

Unix IS user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []