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

2nd call: binary incompatibility


I didn't get any feedback last time from Red Hat or Caldera, so here it is

The long and the short of it is that our developed API is incompatible with
that of Solaris and hence X/"Open".  (The incompatibilites stem from the
vagueness of the RFC and the fact that Sun decided to change something
without mentioning it to us..) I asked before what people thought
about how we should proceed and I was hoping to get comment from some
business that is likely to have to field more help-line calls than I do...

The two functions in question are pam_strerror() and the conversation

In the former case, Solaris decided to require the pamh argument to be
supplied to the pam_strerror() function.  We (in keeping with the PAM RFC)
do not.

The latter case concerns the pam_response structure and how it is filled. 
In some cases they do as we do and in others we differ.

I am on the verge of saying 0.58 is still development code in my book and it
is thus ok to simply break with the past.... However, I am sympathetic to
what those that make money off this code want, so please discuss!  Perhaps
all I should be concerned with is that those with a commercial interest are
aware that we are going to break backward compatibility.  But I'd rather know
now than later...  :^)


               Linux-PAM, libpwdb, Orange-Linux and Linux-GSS

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