On 05/01/2018 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'.

Maybe remove any dep in shadow, since it'd be better to have it the other way
around, see below.

> 
>> 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.
> 

Does it mean you have PAM but you do not use it when running shadow apps
(there are quite a few of them)? I propose the following wording in
"recommended dependencies":
"shadow (should be rebuilt after this package)"
and in the systemd book
"systemd (should be rebuilt after this package)"

>> 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.

In the book, we have also libpwquality, which requires cracklib. But it also
recommends Linux-PAM.

I propose to following wording in recommended dependencies:
"Linux-PAM or shadow or both (build them after cracklib)"

Pierre
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to