Re: libpam, cracklib, and slink (was Re: Release-critical...)
On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Ben Collins wrote:
> Ok, after looking at this, I've decided that the cracklib support for
> PAM would be best handled by having it in a seperate package. I want to
> propose a naming scheme for module packages for PAM similar to how
> apache modules are named, libpam-mod-foo, where foo is the module name.
> Using this scheme the cracklib PAM module package will be named
> libpam-mod-cracklib, and this package will contain the Depends for
> cracklib.
Sounds fine to me.
Will there be a pam-base that all these module packages depend on ?
> NOTE: This naming scheme will reuire the ppp-pam package to be renamed,
> any problems with this?
Why? Isn' this simply ppp with pam support?
--
Jean Pierre
Reply to: