On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 07:44  AM, Greg A. Woods wrote:

>> It doesn't make it better for ANYONE, since there are no applications
>> which use your hypothetical "shim" API.
>
> Excuse me?  Did you forget to _think_ today?  _ALL_ applications which
> use either BSD Auth _or_ PAM already use that proposed API.  ALL OF 
> THEM.

Then you must be saying that your "shim" API is actually the PAM API or 
the BSD Auth API.  Sorry, that simply wasn't clear (to me, at least) in 
any of your previous messages on the subject.

If that is the case, then the obvious choice is the PAM API, since it 
is supported by more applications (last time I checked, anyway).

         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>