Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:11:25 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Cc: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: OpenPAM Figwort broke PAM modules from ports Message-ID: <20050629110805.W74117@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <20050629083042.GB48704@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> References: <20050626211011.GH1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <86d5q8113a.fsf@xps.des.no> <20050627130449.GQ1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <42C0026C.3040000@FreeBSD.org> <20050627191205.GT1283@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <1119900416.27663.15.camel@cream.xbsd.org> <20050629083042.GB48704@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > Would you, or some other commiter, mind putting a note in src/UPDATING > about this please ? This doesn't cost too much while preventing users > from wasting time on understanding why their PAM module installed from > ports don't work any longer when they are not specified with their full > path. Could you propose specific text to add to UPDATING, and I'll drop it in? Perhaps something along the lines of the following: Some previous versions of PAM have permitted the use of non-absolute paths in /etc/pam.conf or /etc/pam.d/* when referring to third party PAM modules in /usr/local/lib. A change has been made to require the use of absolute paths in order to avoid ambiguity and dependence on library path configuration, which may affect existing configurations. Robert N M Watson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050629110805.W74117>