Le 22/01/17 à 17:13, Laurent Bigonville a écrit :
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:59:40 -0600 "Serge E. Hallyn"
<se...@hallyn.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 04:18:29PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote:
> > Hello again,
> >
> > Only focusing on su for this mail, have now studied the previously
> > spotted differences between util-linux and shadow in more detail...
> >
> > TL;DR NEWS.Debian entry and ignoring the difference is probably safe.
>
> Thanks - I agree switching makes sense for Debian. Unfortunately it
> also sounds like it's worthwhile keeping su separately in shadow
upstream
> for any non-pam systems which might be out there. So it sounds like I'm
> not useful here :) and will leave it to the maintainers. Thanks.
Is debian as project supposed to support the non-PAM usecase? All the
rest of the stack is using PAM already
But indeed, upstream should probably keep it, just checked slackaware
and they are using the shadow implementation for /bin/login, maybe
shadow upstream should talk to them.
