Hi,
As dropbear doesn't support AArch64, I hope the author can do something in
order to fix it. In fact I'm the packager of dropbear, some users asked us
why not support aarch64.
To fix this, you can:
1. Use at least autoconf 2.69 to reconfigure.
2. A patch at
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Matt Johnston m...@ucc.asn.au wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:27:49PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
Hi,
As dropbear doesn't support AArch64, I hope the author can do something in
order to fix it. In fact I'm the packager of dropbear, some users asked us
This patch adds support for relaying PAM_ERROR_MSG to clients. This
is useful when PAM_ERROR_MSG returns meaningful information, an
example of this is when pam_nologin is being used and '/etc/nologin'
contains a message for clients attempting to connect.
-Martin
diff -ubNr
Hi,
Thanks for the patch. It looks useful, though I plan to
update Dropbear to full PAM handling (with
keyboard-interactive mode) soon, which should handle this
case as well. If I don't get that done I'll put the patch in
the next release.
My one concern is how clients might deal with multiple
On 13/05/2013 15:06, Matt Johnston wrote:
Hi,
Thanks for the patch. It looks useful, though I plan to
update Dropbear to full PAM handling (with
keyboard-interactive mode) soon, which should handle this
case as well. If I don't get that done I'll put the patch in
the next release.
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 13 May 2013 05:27:49 Christopher Meng wrote:
1. Use at least autoconf 2.69 to reconfigure.
that is incorrect. it has nothing to do with autoconf 2.69.
I disagree with you, aarch64 support was included in
On Monday 13 May 2013 11:39:37 Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Monday 13 May 2013 05:27:49 Christopher Meng wrote:
1. Use at least autoconf 2.69 to reconfigure.
that is incorrect. it has nothing to do with autoconf
Mike, actually I don't want to discuss it here, I think it's not a good
place. IMO AArch64 is too young to introduce it. When I started my
packaging life there is no such arch.
You may noticed that from 2013 there are many such requests appeared, all
of them have same content and a patch
On Monday 13 May 2013 22:01:59 Christopher Meng wrote:
Mike, actually I don't want to discuss it here, I think it's not a good
place. IMO AArch64 is too young to introduce it. When I started my
packaging life there is no such arch.
aarch64 is incidental. this problem has been affecting people
