[Fedora-directory-devel] Is there any client interface for Linux other than pam_ldap?

[Leroy Tennison]

The reason I ask is that the last time I looked at it I was 
disappointed.  The features seemed limited and rudimentary.  You had to 
configure the context in a local file and there was no way to 
dynamically supply a different one.  If there is a more robust 
alternative please let me know, I'd love to try it.  If not please 
consider this an enhancement request - the greatest directory server in 
the world isn't of great value if the client support is limited.  Thanks 
for any and all replies.

[Rich Megginson]

Leroy Tennison wrote:
> The reason I ask is that the last time I looked at it I was 
> disappointed.  The features seemed limited and rudimentary.  You had 
> to configure the context in a local file and there was no way to 
> dynamically supply a different one.  If there is a more robust 
> alternative please let me know, I'd love to try it.  If not please 
> consider this an enhancement request - the greatest directory server 
> in the world isn't of great value if the client support is limited.  
> Thanks for any and all replies.

I don't know of any.  What are some of the features you would like to 
see in pam_ldap: the next generation?
> -- 
> Fedora-directory-devel mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-directory-devel

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 13:35 -0700, Richard Megginson wrote:
> Leroy Tennison wrote:
> > The reason I ask is that the last time I looked at it I was 
> > disappointed.  The features seemed limited and rudimentary.  You had 
> > to configure the context in a local file and there was no way to 
> > dynamically supply a different one.  If there is a more robust 
> > alternative please let me know, I'd love to try it.  If not please 
> > consider this an enhancement request - the greatest directory server 
> > in the world isn't of great value if the client support is limited.  
> > Thanks for any and all replies.
>
> I don't know of any.  What are some of the features you would like to 
> see in pam_ldap: the next generation?

From memory, SuSE has pam_unix2, which does some different things, but
I'm likewise unsure what the original poster is asking for.

Andrew Bartlett