@ryanpcmcquen

Even tho pam is in my repo, I voted yes to include PAM in Slackware.
A normal user will not even notice that pam is there.
I know that dropline gnome also uses PAM
and probably other projects aswell..

Yeah, I've also noticed this phenomena here on LQ. We are such a diverse community that any opinion one may have and post is very likely to deeply offend and piss off someone. I value and appreciate your contribution to the Slackware community, kiki.
I don't need or use Pam, but, I am fine with it being included in a future Slackware release.

2 members found this post helpful.

Look at that:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/drop...s/3.10/x86-64/
http://www.hashbangbash.com/downloads/pam/pkgs/x86_64/
http://bart.dlackware.com/dlackware64-14.2/pre-alpha/
http://www.bisdesign.ca/ivandi/slackware/PAM/

Even if these four projects have different scopes, guess what you will find in all of them. You bet it, Linux-PAM and recompiled shadow. And PAM is not included in any of these projects just for fun. What's the point of having several different implementations of a single core system component.


Cheers

2 members found this post helpful.

Perfectly worded.
Even if PV does not include pam, we as community should sit around and make 1 unified pam package.

1 members found this post helpful.

Generalizations are a very poor way to make an argument.

Niki, perhaps you have not had the foresight to realize, that the reason you, and many others, are drawn to Slackware, is because it has kept packages like PAM out of the base install.

You seem to be lumping Slackware in with distributions that I desperately try to avoid. This has probably already been said, but YOU have plenty of options for a Linux distro with PAM. The COMMUNITY has few options for a Linux distro without PAM. Just like there are few options for a distro without systemd, pulseaudio and dependency resolution.

Are you even sure you would like a Slackware with PAM? Would Slackware perhaps have to compromise its trademark reliability?

Have you even tried Bart's PAM on top of Slackware to see if it can fit your needs?

That being said, if Pat decides to adopt PAM, I will continue to use and endorse Slackware.

5 members found this post helpful.

[...]

Attached Thumbnails

 

3 members found this post helpful.

@kikinovak, your meme indicates to me that you either did not read what you quoted, or that you misunderstood it. Neither is a surprise.

1 members found this post helpful.

A relaxed and polite discussion based solely on technical details and facts would be nice indeed.

1 members found this post helpful.

Bart has the right idea. Kiki if you Ivan and anyone else have resources, then you should pool those resources and create a subbranch of packages just for Linux-PAM. If you want exposure then first you need unification in your design. You need to establish the foundation first by getting the pam editions of packages available, and...

You know what, this is the second time you've both been given a great idea to get PAM for Slackware in a working condition with a series of packages built for PAM that can be easily dropped in as substitutes and you won't listen and just childishly blow it off. If you want this, then formulate a damn roadmap to getting PAM working for Slackware with alternative packages than can easily be swapped out for the non-PAM packages and stop dicking around about it only crying foul about how it needs to be in the base system.

Get a repository with packages for 14.1 made with packages that can easily be identified by Slackpkg, and allow your work to speak for itself.

3 members found this post helpful.

We do not.

http://www.bisdesign.ca/ivandi/slack...___PKG/x86_64/

For Slackware64-current. I stated several times that installing binary packages from random locations is stupid, but if that will make you happy please go ahead.

Awaiting for your meaningful comments.


Cheers

I don't understand what is "unified pam package". For now I have 41 packages (OK 40, one can still use sendmail/sasl instead of exim, but I am not that brave). About 30 of them are recompiled Slackware core packages with pam/kerberos support. And I didn't touch KDE. XScreensaver, tmux, proftpd also have to be recompiled. And may be more. How exactly this thing is supposed to work. What's the point of maintaining a parallel core system.


Cheers

1 members found this post helpful.

The perfect crux of the matter IMO.

While I'm here, could someone please offer solid assurance that PAM would not affect any given admin at all should it come into Slackware? (By "affect" I mean -take up not one second of his time?)

3 members found this post helpful.

Because unless things are tested first across all aspects of usage against the normal packages, including them is pointless if nobody knows how the system will function after the fact for a multitude of users, not just the corporate sector, then it's not worth the effort. You have to test things first, not just slap them in haphazardly and expect all to be well.

I don't have resources myself like AlienBOB or Patrick, but I make an attempt to use what I can to the best of my ability, like GoogleCode, Github, and the various documentation online I can find regarding things, but you don't see making excuses.

Yes, you do.

you should have already realized that you deal with a lot of fanatics here.
and with people that think nothing useful has been invented since the day of lisp and dam every thing new since than.

most of them of course do not use Slackware for their work, if they do they have very limited requirements,
some of course do not even spend most of their time on Slackware, they sit on Apples and Android or Windows devices, of course without damming them for what they did, some even said even GPL is crap.
but on weekends, when they want enjoy their retro feelings they want to boot into a 'true unix like' Linux, brows the internet, visit forums and tell others how cool they are and what you do not need, and than reboot to windows for play a game or turn off the virtual machine on mac to do whatever.
But Slackware has to stay puristic.
and you asking for technical details and facts.

When I start with Slackware it was a great distribution to learn Linux.
but Linux is changing, Linux is not anymore what it was.
this might be sad but it is also reality.
If not today, than for sure tomorrow, it will be that if you start with Slackware you will learn Slackware and not Linux,
And you have to live and learn less and less functionality.
Well, it still might be nice for a hobby, for some.
This is what I think will happen if Slackware does not adopt, but f course many here will know it better.

6 members found this post helpful.