Summary: | Updating PAM to 0.99 may break dependencies | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Christian Speckner <cnspeckn> |
Component: | [OLD] Core system | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers> |
Status: | VERIFIED WORKSFORME | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | x86 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Christian Speckner
2007-10-30 09:49:40 UTC
No, it doesn't break any dependencies. For upgrading, the ebuild already points to http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/pam/upgrade-0.99.xml in cases where needed. Yep, you're right, guess I am hallucinating... I of course am a absolute loony who isn't capable of entering username and password, also, as a rule don't read documentation and upgrade pages, and just in case I did all of that, it must be my bad karma. Oh, and for the people who brought up thread http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-607460-highlight-pam.html , they're not qualified as well because of [plug in your favorite reason here]. Honestly, I did a emerge -uDpvN world on my desktop first (which is NOT the machine this report is about), looked at the list, notices glibc and pam, did a quick search if others had gotten into trouble with upgrading these vital packages, found nothing and proceeded. The pam ebuild pointed me to the upgrade guide, which I read and after which I removed an orphaned file which used pam_stack, upgraded and all went well, not problems whatsoever. I did the same with my girlfriends notebook (which is the machine this bug is about), and the problem I described appeared. It definitely WAS there (I am no fool), and reemerging shadow cured it. If you have an actual issue with pam-0.99.x upgrade, then file a new bug about your particular issue, include errors, steps to reproduce, emerge --info etc. Meanwhile, take your abstract rants elsewhere, nothing to fix here. http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/bugzilla-howto.xml |