On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Yann Dirson <ydir...@free.fr> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 06:21:01PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote: >> In fact, the source says: >> >> /* We don't actually care if the account modules fail or succeed, >> * but we need to run them anyway because certain pam modules >> * depend on side effects of the account modules getting run. >> */ >> >> Looks like this decision was done using wrong assumptions. Not being >> familiar with libpam, I won't risk to propose a patch, but will be >> glad to test one. > > Well, it was too annoying, and I finally got a round tuit. > You'll find my patch in branch 656766. Works fine here for now. >
Thanks Yann! I am not a PAM expert, and it would be nice to have this reviewed and ack'ed by someone who is. Jamie, do you have any comments on these patches? I do not see any reason they should sit in Debian and not upstream. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/xscreensaver.git;a=commitdiff;h=72333d00d8daab8e07c86299e7f86218618a58cb Tormod -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
