From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2VFJLnp010657 for <gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org>; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:19:21 GMT Received: from relay8.poste.it ([62.241.4.185]) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DH1S3-0006QO-1Q for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:19:19 +0000 Received: from flameeyes.is-a-geek.org (151.44.23.151) by relay8.poste.it (7.2.052.3) (authenticated as emanuela.zanon@poste.it) id 420CD9F7000786D6 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:19:20 +0200 From: "Diego \"Flameeyes\" =?iso-8859-1?q?Petten=F2?=" <flameeyes@users.berlios.de> To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] PAM related: pam_console ? Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 17:17:40 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <200503311517.10772@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200503311626.39302@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> <200503311001.14447.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200503311001.14447.vapier@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>, <mailto:gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org>, <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart5571437.TyW49kumro"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200503311717.44937@enterprise.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org> X-Archives-Salt: ded2251d-5dcd-4bf8-aba1-c8acf277207f X-Archives-Hash: 997e3a1dd2c00908f02609926fa4329b --nextPart5571437.TyW49kumro Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 31 March 2005 17:01, Mike Frysinger wrote: > this is so that we (1) dont have to force -fPIC onto libglib.a and (2) we > dont have to move libglib.so into /lib I know why it's there.. is also stated clearly on ebuild and the changelog = :) > eh, you're going to have 'bloat' regardless of using 1 ebuild or 10, it's > just a matter of which kind of bloat you want :p ... and generally i'm > against splitting packages Well.. seeing how other things are getting done with plugins, as pam module= s=20 are just plugins, for example xmms, bmp or gstreamer, the current trend is = to=20 split the ebuilds, instead of adding a lot of useflags. Also, counting that pam_console and the other optional pam_* modules aren't= =20 part of original Linux-PAM makes me prefer having a different ebuild for th= em=20 instead of a single largest one. Well, that's obviously IMHO. Having a virtual/pam and=20 virtual/pam-base-modules is enough to make the openpam interoperability i'd= =20 like to have. And just to make it clear, it's on Linux that I can't build pam_console, I= =20 haven't tried on fbsd, anyway. =2D-=20 Diego "Flameeyes" Petten=F2 http://wwwstud.dsi.unive.it/~dpetteno/ --nextPart5571437.TyW49kumro Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBCTBSYe2h1+2mHVWMRAtXwAKDW54gG8YdW56ColDyOUm0N7rf73QCg3Tu7 QQrnvqmnv1hxhTjH9vLefGs= =IK7N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart5571437.TyW49kumro-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list