Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 30 May 2012 09:50:57 Karel Zak wrote: >> [...] >> IMHO is better to use PAM everywhere than duplicate non-PAM code and >> assume that the code is correct and well tested. PAM is abstraction, >> the final configuration don't have to be complicated. > > PAM is a complete waste of space on embedded devices and controlled systems. > i'm not saying it isn't useful in many setups (perhaps even the majority), > just that it is entirely unnecessary in a not insignificant number of other > setups.
You could still use the PAM API and only implement the features necessary for shadow support. Ie PAM without pluggable modules :-) That way ugly ifdefs and code duplication could be avoided. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
