Hi, On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 11:48 PM Chris Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> wrote:
> Hi, > > * Iker Pedrosa <ipedr...@redhat.com> [240403 09:43]: > > Hi Chris, > > > > I have some questions regarding your proposal: > > > > - What is the difference between liblastlog2 and libpam-lastlog2 > > binaries? Upstream util-linux only provides one binary (lastlog2) so > this > > confuses me. > > 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_*. Everything else sounds good. > > > - Did you consider using a systemd service to upgrade from lastlog to > > lastlog2 data? > > No, I did not consider this, as I wasn't aware of any > implementations for this. Does u-l upstream ship such a service? > Yes, https://github.com/util-linux/util-linux/blob/master/misc-utils/lastlog2-import.service.in > > > This way when the distribution is updated to the next > > version you can also remove the lastlog binary and all its > dependencies. In > > addition, you can use "--disable-lastlog" in shadow to stop building > this > > binary. > > Chris > > -- Iker Pedrosa Senior Software Engineer, Identity Management team Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com> Txapela (gorria) buruan eta ibili munduan (Red) hat on his head and walk the world Basque proverb <https://www.redhat.com>
_______________________________________________ Pkg-shadow-devel mailing list Pkg-shadow-devel@alioth-lists.debian.net https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-shadow-devel
