Le 19/01/2014 18:18, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 19/01/2014 01:11, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit :
>>> Pierre,
>>>
>>> Your suggestion about Linux-PAM tests is very relevant, and something
>>> needs to be done. I have been thinking more about this, reading and
>>> reading again your first post in the thread. Essentially, you are
>>> suggesting to modify the tests instructions, so that if they are run in
>>> an eventual reinstall or upgrade, the user doesn't get the configuration
>>> directory lost. This gave me the following idea.
>>>
>>> What about to summarize this for the user, instead of modifying the
>>> instructions? It would be done in a note just before the tests:
>>>
>>> "If you have a system with Linux-PAM installed and working, and wish to
>>> run the tests, backup first your /etc/pam.d directory and, after the
>>> tests are finished, remember to restore it"
>>>
>> You are right fernando. It is more in the spirit of the book (and of what I
>> suggest in other posts): do not give full instructions for optional commands.
>>
>> OTOH, you really may screw up your system, so maybe a <warning> rather than a
>> note. Something like (not sure about the exact wording):
>>
>> If you have a system with Linux-PAM installed and working, be careful when
>> modifying the files in /etc/pam.d, since your system may become totally
>> unusable. If you want run the tests, backup the /etc/pam.d/other file before
>> running the following commands, and restore it afterwards.
>
> Compromise. Use <caution>. :)
>
> -- Bruce
>
Agreed, I think I have to learn the whole set of admonitions...
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
