From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Feb 10 6:42: 0 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EEED37B401 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2003 06:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.ciam.ru (main.ciam.ru [213.147.57.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D57A043F75 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2003 06:41:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sem@ciam.ru) Received: from exim by mail.ciam.ru with drweb-scanned (Exim 3.36 #1) id 18iF83-0005cr-00; Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:41:51 +0300 Received: from sem.ciam.ru ([192.168.45.10] helo=sem) by mail.ciam.ru with smtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 18iF83-0005ch-00; Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:41:51 +0300 Message-ID: <000c01c2d112$8c469e50$0a2da8c0@sem> From: "Sergey Matveychuk" To: "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" Cc: References: <3E47213D.2060501@ciam.ru> <002301c2d0f7$46df3d10$0799763e@semhome><001101c2d103$7f29ad20$0a2da8c0@sem> Subject: Re: OpenPAM and OSVERSION Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 17:41:51 +0300 Organization: CIAM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Envelope-To: des@ofug.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Because most PAM problems in ports are bugs in the ports themselves, > which Linux-PAM just happens to tolerate and OpenPAM doesn't. In > other words, it should be possible to find a solution to the problem > which works equally well for Linux-PAM and OpenPAM, without the need > to know which is which. And as a last resort, you can make OpenPAM- > specific code conditional on the _OPENPAM preprocessor symbol. No difference for port's user how source is change. Either a patch will apply for 5.0 only when port build or general pach where PAM version detects with preprocessor directives. Result code will be the same. I think it's a style question. What the community opinion? > > What fix will be a right one? > > I can't tell you unless you show me what you believe needs fixing. What a right way escape from PAM_CONV_AGAIN/PAM_TRY_AGAIN and relate code from LINUX_PAM? ---- Sem. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message