On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 06:42:48PM -0500, Bob Willcox wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 04:20:51PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 04:57:39PM -0600, Samuel Chow wrote: > > > > > > > > > > BTW, is there a way to completely disable PAM on a system? > > > > > > I was looking at it a couple months back. There is > > > the NOPAM compiler flag. Unfortunately, telnet and > > > ssh does not obey it. I have some untested patch > > > at home before I got too busy with other non-FreeBSD > > > things. > > > > PAM is considered to be an integral part of the system thesedays; as > > such there's no support for compiling without it. > > Too bad. I find it to be rather painful to understand and configure, and > overkill for most of uses.
Well, the point is that the default configuration is supposed to be exactly equivalent to the old non-PAM behaviour, so you shouldn't have to touch *anything* unless you want to change this behaviour (which would have required code changes in the non-PAM case). Kris
msg50235/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
