Re: debian 2.0
Raul Miller <rdm@test.legislate.com> writes:
> > Oh, foo. Integration of pam was dropped as a release goal of 2.0
> > because it is quite simply not tenable if you want to release hamm
> > before 1999. You can not simply recompile core applications like
> > shadow and net{base,std} with pam and "hope they work", especially
> > not a month+ into freeze.
>
> I didn't realize that pam was this unstable.
I never said it was unstable and it isn't. But we haven't used it
before and I don't care how stable it is, we should not and will not
start recompiling core applications with a previously unused (*in
Debian*) library, one month into a freeze. The decision to postpone
PAM integration till 2.1 was made a long time ago (see the list
archives).
--
James
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: