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

Re: pam_unix or pam_pwdb?



> I believe so.

There may be the disadvantage that glibc-2.1's NSS can't work with
fully statically-linked binaries, while libpam and some PAM modules
can be linked statically as far as I understand (haven't tried, but
might need that soon).

> > The way I see it:
> > first there was pam_unix. It was lacking many features. Then came pam_pwdb,
> > which has support for db file format, as well as NIS.
> > THEN, glibc-2.1 got a decent NSS, and pam_unix could suddently be used for
> > many different authentication formats (file, db, nis, ldap w/o shadow, etc).
> > pam_pwdb remains the same.
> > 
> > So, is pam_unix again the best one to use?

Signed,
Solar Designer



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