Date: Sun, 18 Aug 96 19:14 PDT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens)
Let's plan on having "shadow" be part of the base for 1.2 . We should thus
have the default "login" be aware of it, etc.
Thanks
Bruce
Is this the final decision of the project leader, or is this issue
still open to discussion?
I have the feeling that an awful lot of work is being duplicated here.
All of the work being done to support shadow password files, will have
to be done over again to support PAM. Also, IMHO the PAM framework is
superior, as it supports shadow password files among others (give or
take maybe a few options particular to the shadow package actually
used).
The big question is: is PAM ready for integration in the distribution?
RedHat surely thinks it is stable enough to make some applications PAM
aware. I expect we can take the patches from RedHat, or at least use
their code as an example in case Debian uses other source code. So we
should be able to support PAM in the same time frame as would be
needed to support shadow, at least for some authentication clients
(login, passwd, ...) and some underlying modules (e.g. unix & shadow).
Disclaimer: I am not a PAM expert, I simply monitor the PAM mailing
list to see how progress is made, and have put a Debian package
together with the PAM libraries and the underlying modules. I also
appreciate very much the work already done on shadow support, but I
feel that these issues must be raised.
Patrick
--
People who are doing things for fun do things the right way by
themselves -- Linus Torvalds
