libpam, cracklib, and slink (was Re: Release-critical...)
Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Jean Pierre LeJacq wrote:
> > There's no reason for this to be release-critical. The system works
> > fine except for an annoying email message sent to root every day.
> It's *highly* annoying I have to say, and is very likely to cause lots
> of people to wonder where the number are coming from.
Actually, I believe that the real problem is that libpam0g depends on
cracklib. Surely that's not right? Cracklib has priority extra.
At the moment, everyone who installs ppp-pam (like me) will be forced to
install cracklib, and suffer with daily emails to root. We need to fix
libpam0g. Unfortunately, the maintainer seems to be inactive, and we're
dependent on NMUs. (Ray, that's you!)
I think that there should be a release critical bug here, but I think it
should be #30862: libpam0g depends on cracklib2.
Unless someone objects strongly, I'd like to bump #30862 up to
important. This is a pretty visible problem IMO.
--
Chris Waters xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
Reply to: