From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 21 06:57:42 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6CF16A4CE for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 06:57:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from 62-15-209-148.inversas.jazztel.es (62-15-209-148.inversas.jazztel.es [62.15.209.148]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8F343D58 for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 06:57:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from josemi@freebsd.jazztel.es) Received: from redesjm.local (orion.redesjm.local [192.168.254.16]) j3L6v2WE026164; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:57:02 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by redesjm.local (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id j3L6v1dM001019; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:57:01 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from josemi@redesjm.local) From: Jose M Rodriguez To: Yarema Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:57:00 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <20050414111426.775f6afd.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <200504202144.12138.josemi@redesjm.local> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200504210857.01432.josemi@redesjm.local> X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir Milter (version: 1.1.0-3; AVE: 6.30.0.7; VDF: 6.30.0.116; host: antares.redesjm.local) cc: Milan Obuch cc: Jose M Rodriguez cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: splitting courier-authlib into master+slave ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 06:57:42 -0000 El Jueves, 21 de Abril de 2005 01:48, Yarema escribi=F3: > --On Wednesday, April 20, 2005 21:44:11 +0200 Jose M Rodriguez > > wrote: > > El Wednesday 20 April 2005 20:27, Yarema escribi=F3: > >> FWIW I'd like to weigh in with my opinion. I think this move to a > >> meta port just so we can have OPTIONS selectable dependencies does > >> little to improve usability. As I've argued before in an email to > >> Oliver there's little need to have more than one > >> courier-authlib-method port installed unless one is transitioning > >> from one auth-method to another or just experimenting. > > > > Maybe, but you can trust me in this: have the base port and the > > components selector in the same place it a bad design. > > > > > We have a FreeBSD supported version without a pam library? I think > > no. > > > >> The authpwd module is also documented in the same README to use > >> "the C library's getpw() functions" which in turn are documented > >> to be made "made obsolete by getpwuid(3)" in the FreeBSD getpw(3) > >> man page. > >> > >> So given the above two citations from both courier-authlib docs > >> and FreeBSD's docs why not just do away with authpam being > >> optional and make it the default part of the base package? > > Yes, we do have "a FreeBSD supported version without a pam library" > installed if only the base port is installed. I made this happen to > for the sake of completness and now I'm presenting arguments that it > is a bad idea. Thing is that the courier-authlib port, as it is > committed NOW, will install the no PAM version "libauthpwd.so.0" if > NONE of the OPTIONS are selected. Yet the PLIST in the current > version does not include "libauthpwd.so.0". > No. It isn't the base port, it's the base system. I think that=20 courier-authlib-base _must_ have pw/pam auth without options. Only=20 select what type by libpam presence or OS_VERSION. Remember, this is about split in binary-compatible ports + metaport. No=20 options or knobs may live in courier-authlib-base or=20 courier-authlib-. Only the courier-authlib metaport will have this. I can't work on this until weekend, but I'll try to have a candidate on=20 sunday. =2D- josemi