On 5.1.2018. 17:43, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Pierre Labastie wrote:
Hi,
Happy New Year to the followers of this list.
I'm testing a new version of jhalfs for BLFS, and I've found that nothing
depends on shadow... This prompted me to investigate dependencies
involving
shadow, cracklib, and Linux-PAM.
Here are some oddities I've found:
1) in the required dependencies for shadow, we have "Linux-PAM or
cracklib".
Obviously none of those are required, since shadow can be built
without them.
I suggest moving them to "recommended".
The only reason for shadow in BLFS is to add PAM/cracklib. The term
'Required' may be a little inconsistent, but we need something stronger
than 'Recommended'.
Time for introducing "Highly recommended"?
2) shadow is not mentioned as a dependency of Linux-PAM, but it is
said that
shadow should be reinstalled after installing Linux-PAM. Actually,
Linux-PAM
is pretty useless without recompiling shadow. I suggest moving shadow to
"required runtime" (with appropriate wording). Same for systemd in the
systemd
book.
I'm OK with that, but I do add pam without rebuilding shadow in System V
and it seems to not cause any problems.
3) shadow is not mentioned as a dependency of cracklib, but it is said
that
shadow must be reinstalled after installing cracklib. I suggest moving
shadow
to "required runtime" (with appropriate wording) for cracklib.
"Required runtime" does not seem to be the right wording to me. I admit
that cracklib is not very useful in BLFS without rebuilding shadow, but
the issue is merely wording.
IIRC, the program 'john the ripper' (http://www.openwall.com/john/) uses
cracklib also.
-- Bruce
There's also libpwquality that requires cracklib, but optionally uses PAM.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/postlfs/libpwquality.html
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
