Re: pam

[Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>]

On Sunday 03 August 2008 06:43, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=493181
> >
> > In the above bug report I have requested a config file comment change and
> > suggested that an application be made to have it included in Lenny.
> >
> > I realise that comment changes won't be really desired by the release
> > team, but I think it would be really good to have the comments matching
> > the latest code.
>
> Does this point to a regression in pam_selinux's compatibility with configs
> using it from etch?  Should we patch pam_selinux to map the obsolete
> 'multiple' option to something appropriate, to provide an upgrade path?

Currently the "multiple" option seems to be simply ignored.  I don't think 
that this issue is important enough to have backward compatibility.

-- 
russell@coker.com.au
http://etbe.coker.com.au/          My Blog

http://www.coker.com.au/sponsorship.html Sponsoring Free Software development