| 1 |
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 00:19 +0200, Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 31 March 2005 23:35, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > if you do split it though, i'd suggest you split every module rather than |
| 4 |
> > just certain ones that catch your fancy ... better to be consistent :p |
| 5 |
> That's what I wanted to do, provide only basic modules with linux-pam |
| 6 |
> (pam_unix and other) needed for basic auth facilities. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
And every time there is a version update also update the slew of other |
| 10 |
ebuilds? Like I said, if I wanted to be in the KDE/gstreamer herds, I |
| 11 |
would have been. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> pam_console was just the first of the list. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
You want it that bad, you can do it, but then you are its daddy, and do |
| 17 |
all the updating, bug fixing (I'm sure the devfs crap do will give |
| 18 |
issues, as its compile tested to 0.78 api) etc (and thank god if you |
| 19 |
do). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> Anyway, pam 0.79 is out.. I just ask pam herd if they can add virtual/pam so |
| 22 |
> that we can continue on openpam :) |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yes, I know will get to it somewhere - its usually a pita to get some |
| 26 |
patches updated (pam_console-* for example :/) ... I'll get to it |
| 27 |
eventually (want to first see what fedora do, as many pam guys are from |
| 28 |
redhat). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 33 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 34 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives