On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 09:19:09AM +0200, Iker Pedrosa wrote: > On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 11:48 PM Chris Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> wrote: > > util-linux upstream provides three binary objects to be built: > > - liblastlog2.so > > - pam_lastlog2.so > > - lastlog2 (program) > > > > Debian's PAM policy says to put PAM modules into their own package, > > thus libpam-lastlog2. liblastlog2.so would go into the > > > liblastlog2(-0) package. The lastlog2 program either into its own > > lastlog2 package, or elsewhere. > > > > Please, let's call this pam_lastlog2 and not libpam-lastlog2. AFAIK, all > pam modules start with the prefix pam_*.
The file names do, but the package names almost always start with "libpam-". (Also, Debian package names may not contain "_".) $ apt-file search security/pam_ | grep -v libpam-modules | grep --count ^libpam- 68 $ apt-file search security/pam_ | grep -v libpam-modules | grep --count ^pam- 1 And the Debian PAM mini-policy says: 1) Packages should use the naming scheme of `libpam-<name>' (eg. libpam-ldap). -- Colin Watson (he/him) [cjwat...@debian.org]
