| 1 |
On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 00:11 +0200, Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > > openpam will pdepend on |
| 4 |
> > > freebsd-pam-modules to provide both in a simple way. |
| 5 |
> > Why? What good will they do on linux? Just stick them in bsd profile. |
| 6 |
> Mainly, openpam is shipped without any kind of module. If someone would like |
| 7 |
> to replace Linux-PAM with openpam on a Linux system (it's possible), I'd much |
| 8 |
> prefer to provide it with everything he needs. Linux-PAM builds its own |
| 9 |
> modules, openpam just provide pam implementation and needs other packages to |
| 10 |
> provide the basic modules. FreeBSD's modules should work on Linux and this |
| 11 |
> would make possible the switch between Linux-PAM and openpam. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I was more talking about the virtual/pam-modules (or whatever). Having |
| 15 |
a a PDEPEND is just fine. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> > Like I said before, only real reason why I will biatch about this one, |
| 18 |
> > is its called 'pam' on all linux distro's, and it will be another lost |
| 19 |
> > history (ok, so the workaround is a schlepp) case without real cause. |
| 20 |
> Actually it's called libpam usually :) |
| 21 |
> Mainly, calling it pam is usual on linux-centric systems, but as Gentoo is not |
| 22 |
> only Linux, and "it's all about choice", having it called as it's named, |
| 23 |
> IMHO, is a way to state clearly what it is. |
| 24 |
> Just take a look to telnet-bsd and netkit-telnetd. On Debian there's |
| 25 |
> netkit-telnet which is called just telnet. |
| 26 |
> Anyway this is only "cosmetic" and for what I "need" or better I feel is |
| 27 |
> needed, this is something which can be omissed. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Like I said - its more just me than anything else. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> > Ugh, no - just more crud that somebody will have to clean out later. |
| 33 |
> > Like I said, get pam-0.78 and issues fixed, bumped to stable on all |
| 34 |
> > linux archs, and we can scourge the tree. |
| 35 |
> That's a decision up to you as pam mantainers :) |
| 36 |
> Anyway I'm available to add the temporary fixes, trace them, and remove them |
| 37 |
> when all is done, if needed. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Id rather just do it cleanly. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> > > I'll work anyway on a pam_stack hack for openpam, also if I'm not sure |
| 43 |
> > > if, when and how I'll be able to make it work... also I don't like too |
| 44 |
> > > much messing with security stuff :/ |
| 45 |
> > Sorry, you are on your own here. |
| 46 |
> I know and I'll try to do everything I can, but if in the mean time it could |
| 47 |
> be used the other method should be enough until there's a way to "support" |
| 48 |
> pam_stack on openpam. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Well, the include should work, be the cleanest and less up and down way |
| 52 |
(you really do not want to coordinate a big change across the tree in |
| 53 |
more than one direction more than once - you usually end up burning |
| 54 |
yourself) - I'll work through the pam bugs for 0.78, and see if we can |
| 55 |
get it pushed to stable. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Thanks, |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 62 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 63 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives