ppp & pam (was: Re: ppp's ip-{up,down} and possible utilization of 'run-parts')

[Philip Hands <phil@hands.com>]

> Philip Hands <phil@hands.com> writes:
> 
> > I thought I'd call the PAM-free ppp package ppp-base, like perl-base.
> > I'm still not sure about the best way to do this though.  It looks like the 
> > only thing that needs to be different is the pppd binary, so:
> > 
> > Should I make ppp contain only the pppd with PAM binary, and have it
> > depend on ppp-base (which would contain most of the rest of ppp), and
> > use alternates on pppd ?
> 
> That sounds pretty complicated with little gains.  What's the
> disadvantage of having PAM in the normal pppd.  More complicated to
> setup?  Much bigger binary?

ppp is needed for doing an install from the internet via a dialup link.  PAM is not needed until you want people to log into the system, so libpam is a waste of space on the install disks.

I'm not certain it's worth the effort either, since libpam is only 21k and binary is almost exactly the same size (112 bytes bigger) --- opinions ?

BTW does libpam0 need to be recompiled for libc6 before I can use it in ppp ?

Cheers, Phil.


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .