On 02/04/2018 22:25, Pierre Labastie wrote: > Hi, > > Usually, I build PAM early, but this time, I decided not to, to check > dependencies. And building cups-2.2.7, I receive: > ------- > Compiling auth.c... > auth.c: In function 'cups_crypt': > auth.c:2021:5: error: unknown type name '_cups_md5_state_t'; did you mean > '_cups > _message_t'? > _cups_md5_state_t state; /* Primary MD5 state info */ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > _cups_message_t > auth.c:2022:5: error: unknown type name '_cups_md5_state_t'; did you mean > '_cups_message_t'? > _cups_md5_state_t state2; /* Secondary MD5 state info */ > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > _cups_message_t > auth.c:2042:5: warning: implicit declaration of function '_cupsMD5Init'; did > you mean '_cupsRWInit'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > _cupsMD5Init(&state); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > _cupsRWInit > auth.c:2043:5: warning: implicit declaration of function '_cupsMD5Append'; did > you mean '_cups_toupper'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > _cupsMD5Append(&state, (unsigned char *)pw, pwlen); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > _cups_toupper > auth.c:2050:5: warning: implicit declaration of function '_cupsMD5Finish'; did > you mean '_cupsStrFlush'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > _cupsMD5Finish(&state2, digest); > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > _cupsStrFlush > make[1]: *** [../Makedefs:265: auth.o] Error 1 > make: *** [Makefile:38: all] Error 1 > -------------- > > The "cups_crypt" function is only defined if HAVE_LIBPAM is 0. That's why this > error does not occur if pam is installed. > > According to https://github.com/apple/cups/pull/5253 (which is about the > development branch), libpam will be made required for cups sooner or later. > So I suggest to recommend pam for cups right now (and require it when it > becomes mandatory). > > Note that upstream has backported the change they made to address the issue in > their development branch, but I suspect one part of the backport has been > forgotten. >
Upstream has made a new commit yesterday: https://github.com/apple/cups/commit/570933a6a3597371bae1beeb754ee8711d6305ab which should fix building without PAM. But Istill think it is better to recommend PAM anyway, instead of making a patch. Thoughts? Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
