Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
Am Mittwoch, dem 02.12.2020 um 20:13 +0100 schrieb Tim Tassonis via
blfs-dev:
>
> On 12/1/20 11:23 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote:
> > On 12/1/20 3:02 PM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 12/1/20 5:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote:
> > > > On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote:
> > > > > Hi all
> > > > >
> > > > > When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against
> > > > > bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build.
> > > > >
> > > > > As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using
> > > > > pam, I found out that by specifying
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --enable-db=no
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > at configure time, pam will be build without it.
> > > > >
> > > > > It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam
> > > > > page. What do others think about it?
> > > >
> > > > Not sure. We have bdb listed as optional. We really don't normally
> > > > list how to disable optional packages. I really don't know what it
> > > > does for pam. Looking at the man page it says it is a PAM module to
> > > > authenticate against a db database.
> > > >
> > > > Looking at my log, it appears to just build the module pam_userdb.so.
> > > > It looks like the only downside of building that module if you are
> > > > not going to use it is using about 72 KB on disk.
> > >
> > > Well, libdb is a bit bigger:
> > >
> > >
> > > ls -lh /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so
> > >
> > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.9M Oct 13 08:46 /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so
> > >
> > > I fully agree that the book is not here to allow to minimize run-time
> > > dependencies, it only covers build AND run dependencies.
> > >
> > > So, I can live well without the info in the book, I have in now in my
> > > build script.
> > >
> > > My scenario is: I always install PAM on all systems, but bdb only when
> > > needed. If pam is linked against bdb, this will require the 2 MB big
> > > libdb to be installed as well on all systems.
> > >
> > > But that is just my scenario, other BLFS users use their systems
> > > differently and don't have this problem.
> >
> > If you do not already have bdb installed, then there is no issue. If it
> > is installed, then only the 72 KB module is added.
>
> The thing is: I do build everything from source, like in the book, but
> with DESTDIR. I then deploy the resulting binaries onto different
> machines, and there I run into added run-time dependencies, if bdb was
> installed on the build host.
>
> Clearly, this is not strictly the book's scope, but if other people work
> like I do, they might run into the same problems.
Thats what i do, too. But i have bdb installed always upfront to pam,
so that issue never came up. My PM is not that featured to get all the
dependencies to a full extend. Installing on another machine is more
or less crawling down a (static) list of packages i always want to
have on any system. This list is also the build order when doing full
rebuilds. So, bdb is always available here. As you said, PM is a bit
beyond {,B}LFS and I can accept if focus is not set on supporting it.
I'd say that we (the ones who explore PM challenges) might be able to
tackle those issues. So i'd also agree with Bruce to hardly add those
notes to the book because it gives the feeling to the user that all
instructions in the book are detailled to that deep level. And for
sure, they are not. So it would create inconsitencies - here we're
adding a note, there we do not. It would be a tremendous work to track
down all the optional dependencies (imagin pkgs like PHP or QT).
That pam/bdb thing can become a real issue if /usr is a separate
partition mounted later after pam has already have to be activated,
Than, pam will not work as the .so is not available yet. But i think
that kind of system configuration is quite exotic (nowadays).
--
Thomas
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
On 12/1/20 11:23 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 3:02 PM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 5:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: Hi all When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build. As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using pam, I found out that by specifying --enable-db=no at configure time, pam will be build without it. It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam page. What do others think about it? Not sure. We have bdb listed as optional. We really don't normally list how to disable optional packages. I really don't know what it does for pam. Looking at the man page it says it is a PAM module to authenticate against a db database. Looking at my log, it appears to just build the module pam_userdb.so. It looks like the only downside of building that module if you are not going to use it is using about 72 KB on disk. Well, libdb is a bit bigger: ls -lh /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.9M Oct 13 08:46 /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so I fully agree that the book is not here to allow to minimize run-time dependencies, it only covers build AND run dependencies. So, I can live well without the info in the book, I have in now in my build script. My scenario is: I always install PAM on all systems, but bdb only when needed. If pam is linked against bdb, this will require the 2 MB big libdb to be installed as well on all systems. But that is just my scenario, other BLFS users use their systems differently and don't have this problem. If you do not already have bdb installed, then there is no issue. If it is installed, then only the 72 KB module is added. The thing is: I do build everything from source, like in the book, but with DESTDIR. I then deploy the resulting binaries onto different machines, and there I run into added run-time dependencies, if bdb was installed on the build host. Clearly, this is not strictly the book's scope, but if other people work like I do, they might run into the same problems. Bye Tim -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
On 12/1/20 3:02 PM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 5:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: Hi all When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build. As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using pam, I found out that by specifying --enable-db=no at configure time, pam will be build without it. It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam page. What do others think about it? Not sure. We have bdb listed as optional. We really don't normally list how to disable optional packages. I really don't know what it does for pam. Looking at the man page it says it is a PAM module to authenticate against a db database. Looking at my log, it appears to just build the module pam_userdb.so. It looks like the only downside of building that module if you are not going to use it is using about 72 KB on disk. Well, libdb is a bit bigger: ls -lh /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.9M Oct 13 08:46 /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so I fully agree that the book is not here to allow to minimize run-time dependencies, it only covers build AND run dependencies. So, I can live well without the info in the book, I have in now in my build script. My scenario is: I always install PAM on all systems, but bdb only when needed. If pam is linked against bdb, this will require the 2 MB big libdb to be installed as well on all systems. But that is just my scenario, other BLFS users use their systems differently and don't have this problem. If you do not already have bdb installed, then there is no issue. If it is installed, then only the 72 KB module is added. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
On 12/1/20 5:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: Hi all When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build. As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using pam, I found out that by specifying --enable-db=no at configure time, pam will be build without it. It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam page. What do others think about it? Not sure. We have bdb listed as optional. We really don't normally list how to disable optional packages. I really don't know what it does for pam. Looking at the man page it says it is a PAM module to authenticate against a db database. Looking at my log, it appears to just build the module pam_userdb.so. It looks like the only downside of building that module if you are not going to use it is using about 72 KB on disk. Well, libdb is a bit bigger: ls -lh /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.9M Oct 13 08:46 /usr/lib/libdb-5.3.so I fully agree that the book is not here to allow to minimize run-time dependencies, it only covers build AND run dependencies. So, I can live well without the info in the book, I have in now in my build script. My scenario is: I always install PAM on all systems, but bdb only when needed. If pam is linked against bdb, this will require the 2 MB big libdb to be installed as well on all systems. But that is just my scenario, other BLFS users use their systems differently and don't have this problem. Bye Tim -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: Hi all When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build. As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using pam, I found out that by specifying --enable-db=no at configure time, pam will be build without it. It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam page. What do others think about it? Not sure. We have bdb listed as optional. We really don't normally list how to disable optional packages. I really don't know what it does for pam. Looking at the man page it says it is a PAM module to authenticate against a db database. Looking at my log, it appears to just build the module pam_userdb.so. It looks like the only downside of building that module if you are not going to use it is using about 72 KB on disk. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Linux-PAM option --enable-db=no
On 12/1/20 7:48 AM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote: Hi all When re-building pam version 1.5.1, I noticed that it links against bdb, because I had installed bdb since my last pam build. As I'm not really fond of including bdb in all installations using pam, I found out that by specifying --enable-db=no at configure time, pam will be build without it. It might be a good idea to add a remark about that option on the pam page. What do others think about it? Bye Tim Hi Tim, I think this is a good idea. A command explanation seems like the right fit -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
