Date: 07 Mar 2002 00:44:51 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libpam/modules modules.inc src/lib/libpam/modules/pam_alreadyloggedin Makefile pam_alreadyloggedin.8 pam_alreadyloggedin.c Message-ID: <xzp66496z2k.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <200203062318.g26NIGw43435@green.bikeshed.org> References: <200203062318.g26NIGw43435@green.bikeshed.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org> writes: > Robert took a look at it, and other people agreed it was a generally > interesting module to have. Add to that that it's small, not turned on > unless you do it yourself, and doesn't break the build, and I don't see what > the problem is adding a new PAM module. You know that I am working on PAM, yet it did not occur to you to even ask me if I had thought of something like this, or if I had any plans to implement something like this. Even assuming that I think pam_alreadyloggedin is a good idea (which I don't), it did not even occur to you that I might possibly object to the name of the module (which I do), or the way it was implemented (which I do), or the code style (which I do). It did not even occur to you that less than 24 hours after I completely replaced libpam with new and relatively untested code might not be the ideal time to commit a new module. I don't really mind having the module in the tree, even though I think it's a spectacularly bad idea from a security standpoint, but I do mind its name and about half of its implementation (measured in loc), so you might as well back it out. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp66496z2k.fsf>