> checking for security/pam_appl.h... yes
> checking security/pam_modules.h usability... no checking
> security/pam_modules.h presence... yes
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: present but cannot be
> compiled
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: check for missing
> prerequisite headers?
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: see the Autoconf
> documentation
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: section "Present But
> Cannot Be Compiled"
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: proceeding with the
> preprocessor's result
> configure: WARNING: security/pam_modules.h: in the future, the compiler
> will take precedence
> configure: WARNING: ## ------------------------------------------ ##
> configure: WARNING: ## Report this to the AC_PACKAGE_NAME lists. ##
> configure: WARNING: ## ------------------------------------------ ##
> checking for security/pam_modules.h... yes checking pam/pam_appl.h
> usability... no checking pam/pam_appl.h presence... no checking for
> pam/pam_appl.h... No

This has been fixed in the proftpd sources in CVS, and will be fixed in
the next RC release.

> What does this mean and does it require any action from my side to get
> PAM working ?

It means that a particular header file needed to be part of the configure
check on Solaris 9. It does not (or should not, anyway) require any
action from your side to get PAM support included in proftpd.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Each man is the smith of his own fortune.

-Appius Claudius Caecus

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
ProFTPD Users List
Unsubscribe problems?