On 24/06/26 16:26, Sam Hartman wrote:
I have a patch that logs an error on the use of /usr/lib/pam.d. That's
kind of a big hammer, and I want to reread my 2023 reasoning and double
check that's the right answer for Debian before releasing that patch.
Can I ask (and this probably should be moved to a separate discussion in
new bug report): why?
Are the energy and time going into this effort well spent?
Upstream has a certain functionality, users appreciate that
functionality, downstream distros and sysadmins mwould like to make use
of that functionality. What does Debian users gain by removing it?
Please note that most of the base packages in a modern Debian system
already use the "configuration in /etc overrides /usr/" paradigm. How is
PAM in Debian so different from all other services that it requires
abandoning that paradigm?
Regards,
--
Gioele Barabucci
