Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Ken Moffat wrote: On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:17:06PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Ken Moffat wrote: My preference is recommended, if possible. But agree with Ken's decision if he still wishes to promote to required My rationale is that Recommended either means (i.) The package can build

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Ken Moffat
On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 09:40:07PM -0600, William Harrington wrote: > On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 02:17:25 + > Ken Moffat wrote: > > > I'm trying to build libpwquality, for whichever part of kde5 now > > requires it. I noted that we have PAM and Cracklib as > >

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Ken Moffat
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:27:10PM -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 08-02-2016 00:40, William Harrington escreveu: > > On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 02:17:25 + > > Ken Moffat wrote: > > > >> I'm trying to build libpwquality, for whichever part of kde5 now > >> requires

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Ken Moffat wrote: My preference is recommended, if possible. But agree with Ken's decision if he still wishes to promote to required My rationale is that Recommended either means (i.) The package can build without this, and without extra configure switches, but the recommended package

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Fernando de Oliveira
Em 08-02-2016 17:28, Ken Moffat escreveu: > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:27:10PM -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> Em 08-02-2016 00:40, William Harrington escreveu: >>> On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 02:17:25 + >>> Ken Moffat wrote: >>> I'm trying to build libpwquality,

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-08 Thread Ken Moffat
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:17:06PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > > >>My preference is recommended, if possible. But agree with Ken's decision > >>if he still wishes to promote to required > >> > >My rationale is that Recommended either means > > > >(i.) The package can build

Re: [blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-07 Thread William Harrington
On Mon, 8 Feb 2016 02:17:25 + Ken Moffat wrote: > I'm trying to build libpwquality, for whichever part of kde5 now > requires it. I noted that we have PAM and Cracklib as > "Recommended". Fedora has a patch which is supposed to make it optional, as far as I can

[blfs-dev] libpwquality : should cracklib be required ?

2016-02-07 Thread Ken Moffat
I'm trying to build libpwquality, for whichever part of kde5 now requires it. I noted that we have PAM and Cracklib as "Recommended". I don't have any argument about PAM - for a graphical login using sddm I accept it is needed. But I'm still trying to not fill up my rootfs, so I assumed there