Re: sudo and cracklib
Apologies for the personal cc's, but I *really* want to make sure this
message gets noticed.
Guy Maor wrote:
> Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net> writes:
> > I thought that the new pam maintainer was going to fix this problem
> It was fixed by Ray:
I apologize for suggesting that nothing has been done about this
problem, but the problem has *not* been fixed.
> pam (0.65-0.8) frozen unstable; urgency=high
I don't even *see* a package called "pam" in slink. The problem is that
in slink, the ppp-pam package depends on libpam0g, libpam0g (0.65-0.8)
depends on libpam0g-util, and libpam0g-util (same version) depends on
cracklib2. This was still true after a recent upload of many of those
packages.
I don't care about potato, I'll switch to potato as soon as slink looks
solid enough to release.
Note that I haven't raised or re-prioritized any bugs yet, but I
strongly feel that this is something that should be fixed before the
slink release. The ppp-pam package is used by a lot of people, and when
they upgrade to slink, we're going to cram cracklib2 down their throats
unless we do something about this. Either we fix the dependencies, or
we decide we *are* going to give all these people cracklib, and fix the
daily email bug *it* has (and adjust its priority up from "Extra").
--
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: