Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static (was: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh)

2003-11-26 Thread Jacques A. Vidrine
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 02:00:08AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > How much do you intend to use NSS for? I mean, what's the point of > > adopting this cool infrastructure if all you are going to do with it > > is make a better PAM out

Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static (was: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh)

2003-11-25 Thread Matthias Andree
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 02:00:08AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > > As a user, I like /rescue better than the step-child that /stand/* used > > to be. It's part of the world, which /stand wasn't. > > Except that we still have /stand. It should be shot

Re: NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static (was: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh)

2003-11-25 Thread David O'Brien
On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 02:00:08AM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > As a user, I like /rescue better than the step-child that /stand/* used > to be. It's part of the world, which /stand wasn't. Except that we still have /stand. It should be shot, but some won't let it go... ___

NSS and PAM, dynamic vs. static (was: 40% slowdown with dynamic /bin/sh)

2003-11-25 Thread Matthias Andree
Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > How much do you intend to use NSS for? I mean, what's the point of > adopting this cool infrastructure if all you are going to do with it > is make a better PAM out of it? The important thing is that NSS allows to plug modules such as LDAP