On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 00:11 +0200, Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenà wrote:
> > > openpam will pdepend on > > > freebsd-pam-modules to provide both in a simple way. > > Why? What good will they do on linux? Just stick them in bsd profile. > Mainly, openpam is shipped without any kind of module. If someone would like > to replace Linux-PAM with openpam on a Linux system (it's possible), I'd much > prefer to provide it with everything he needs. Linux-PAM builds its own > modules, openpam just provide pam implementation and needs other packages to > provide the basic modules. FreeBSD's modules should work on Linux and this > would make possible the switch between Linux-PAM and openpam. > I was more talking about the virtual/pam-modules (or whatever). Having a a PDEPEND is just fine. > > Like I said before, only real reason why I will biatch about this one, > > is its called 'pam' on all linux distro's, and it will be another lost > > history (ok, so the workaround is a schlepp) case without real cause. > Actually it's called libpam usually :) > Mainly, calling it pam is usual on linux-centric systems, but as Gentoo is > not > only Linux, and "it's all about choice", having it called as it's named, > IMHO, is a way to state clearly what it is. > Just take a look to telnet-bsd and netkit-telnetd. On Debian there's > netkit-telnet which is called just telnet. > Anyway this is only "cosmetic" and for what I "need" or better I feel is > needed, this is something which can be omissed. > Like I said - its more just me than anything else. > > Ugh, no - just more crud that somebody will have to clean out later. > > Like I said, get pam-0.78 and issues fixed, bumped to stable on all > > linux archs, and we can scourge the tree. > That's a decision up to you as pam mantainers :) > Anyway I'm available to add the temporary fixes, trace them, and remove them > when all is done, if needed. > Id rather just do it cleanly. > > > I'll work anyway on a pam_stack hack for openpam, also if I'm not sure > > > if, when and how I'll be able to make it work... also I don't like too > > > much messing with security stuff :/ > > Sorry, you are on your own here. > I know and I'll try to do everything I can, but if in the mean time it could > be used the other method should be enough until there's a way to "support" > pam_stack on openpam. > Well, the include should work, be the cleanest and less up and down way (you really do not want to coordinate a big change across the tree in more than one direction more than once - you usually end up burning yourself) - I'll work through the pam bugs for 0.78, and see if we can get it pushed to stable. Thanks, -- Martin Schlemmer Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer Cape Town, South Africa
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
