Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] New Linux-PAM stabling plans
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:10:48
Message-Id: 1183576059.7927.2.camel@localhost
1 Forwarded by request of somebody thats smart/lucky enough to not
2 be on this list but still monitoring it.
4 -------- Forwarded Message --------
5 From: Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <flameeyes@g.o>
6 Subject: New Linux-PAM stabling plans
7 Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 20:51:36 +0200
9 Hi everybody; sorry to mail here rather than -dev, but I'm not
10 subscribed to it and I have no intention to subscribe in the next
11 future. Please forward a copy of this message to gentoo-dev if you can
12 and want, thanks.
14 Since while I was gone nobody took care of PAM, I had to resume work on
15 it (sigh), and almost at the same time I got reported that PAM 0.78
16 doesn't allow to set some limits in limits.conf to "unlimited" value.
17 This is a good enough reason to work actively on marking 0.99 stable.
19 Unfortunately, 0.99 upgrade isn't entirely trivial, as is
20 gone, pam_userdb is moved and so is pam_console, plus a few more
21 modules are no more present at all.
23 To solve this issue, I just wrote an upgrade guide in the PAM project
24 that will appear soon at [1]. That guide should contain all the
25 information needed to pass through the upgrade easily.
27 I also have an ebuild ready to commit that will make a lot of warnings
28 and various noise when the pam.d file in the system still refers to the
29 removed packages, pointing to the upgrade guide. It also dies if the
30 user still has pam_stack or other modules that are not moved but really
31 not available. (I'm still not sure where I should die: pkg_setup would
32 stop users from building pkgs, pkg_preinst would waste people time if
33 they didn't notice the warnings at setup stage, as right now the
34 warnings are printed in both, and preinst dies).
36 I'd really like comments on the guide (that still has to pass through
37 an editor -- Josh would you mind? :) -- so please skip grammar check
38 for now ;) ), so that I can address whatever is needed.
40 Now, I could ask stabilization even right now, but, I'm not sure how to
41 convey enough focus on what is going to happen. I'll write about this
42 on Planet for sure, but then? Is GLEP42 ready? Should I ask PR people
43 to publish this?
45 Anyway, I'll at least give it a week or two for more testing and for
46 proofreading the guide; developers are invited to try the upgrade on
47 their (non-production first) machines, and report immediately any
48 problem with the procedure.
50 Sorry for the delay to get a decent PAM working, thanks for waiting.
52 [1]
54 Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
57 --
58 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Linux-PAM stabling plans Josh Saddler <nightmorph@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Linux-PAM stabling plans Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>