Hi!
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:04:00AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
WRT to the patch you sent -- alternative way to achieve
the same effect would be to make login package
non-required on The Hurd, wouldn't it?
Totally, but
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:47:03PM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:04:00AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
WRT to the patch you sent -- alternative way to achieve
the same effect would be to make login
Hi!
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:25:13PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:47:03PM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:04:00AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
WRT to the patch you sent
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 04:58:11PM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
BTW, there are 3 other ways to work around the bug:
1) place shadow's login, su et al. in
/bin/login.shadow, /bin/su.shadow and so on (when
packaging for the Hurd)
2) use diversions
3) use alternatives
1) and 3) could
Hi!
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:55:58PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:37:40PM +0100, Nicolas François wrote:
We probably also need to remove the passwd dependency on login (loginpam
substvar).
The Hurd package provides login, so the dependency gets resolved
(because
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
WRT to the patch you sent -- alternative way to achieve
the same effect would be to make login package
non-required on The Hurd, wouldn't it?
Totally, but this is not technically possible right now in Debian
(there are no
6 matches
Mail list logo
