Randy McMurchy wrote:
> If you've already created new patches, please upload them to the
> LFS patch repo and I'll pick them up from there and do significant
> testing.
>
Haven't created anything yet except the shadow patch, but I did go ahead
and get notes ready for upgrade of all three (cracklib-pam-shadow), but
didn't want to proceed untill I had a test case availble so that Heimdal
didn't get broken.
> This will be about a week from now. By next weekend for sure. From
> now until then, I'll be updating the other packages I have assigned
> to me in Bugzilla. I have GnuCash almost finished (dependency hell!)
> and will commit that update today.
>
I am currently running shadow 4.0.9/10/cvs11? (9 with the patch is fine
for BLFS to match LFS), LinuxPAM-0.80, and Cracklib-2.8.3. I have taken
notes for changes to the build instructions.
Cracklib-2.8.3:
./configure --prefix=/usr --datadir=/lib && make && make install
mv /usr/lib/libcrack.so /lib &&
create-cracklib-dict /usr/share/dict/words \
/usr/share/dict/extra.words
Linux_PAM-0.80
<new patch or sed required to add '/lib /lib/cracklib' to
CRACKLIB_DICTPATH in configure.in>
add the configure switch --manpath=/usr/share/man and nix the 'manpath' sed
Shadow-4.0.9:
Add the patch, and the for loop shoud be extended:
CHFN_AUTH \
ULIMIT ENV_TZ ENV_HZ ENV_SUPATH \
FAILLOG_ENAB QUOTAS_ENAB FTMP_FILE \
ENV_PATH QMAIL_DIR MAIL_DIR MAIL_FILE
and A note added that says something to the effect of "untill login.defs
is setup corectly, (in the test before configuring) login will generate
several warnings about unknown parameters, this is normal."
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
