On 25.01.2012 03:39, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 03:31:07PM +0400, Ilya Matveychikov wrote:
> On 20.01.2012 15:17, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:04:14AM +0000, Matveychikov Ilya wrote:
>>> This patch fix errors when building with ./configure
>>> --enable-static-modules
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/modules/pam_pwhistory/opasswd.c
>>> b/modules/pam_pwhistory/opasswd.c
>>> index 738483a..ff1b94c 100644
>>> --- a/modules/pam_pwhistory/opasswd.c
>>> +++ b/modules/pam_pwhistory/opasswd.c
>>> @@ -113,8 +113,8 @@ compare_password(const char *newpass, const char
>>> *oldpass)
>>>
>>> /* Check, if the new password is already in the opasswd file. */
>>> int
>>> -check_old_password (pam_handle_t *pamh, const char *user,
>>> - const char *newpass, int debug)
>>> +check_old_pass (pam_handle_t *pamh, const char *user,
>>> + const char *newpass, int debug)
>>> {
>>> int retval = PAM_SUCCESS;
>>> FILE *oldpf;
>>> @@ -209,8 +209,8 @@ check_old_password (pam_handle_t *pamh, const char
>>> *user,
>>> }
>>>
>>> int
>>> -save_old_password (pam_handle_t *pamh, const char *user, uid_t uid,
>>> - const char *oldpass, int howmany, int debug UNUSED)
>>> +save_old_pass (pam_handle_t *pamh, const char *user, uid_t uid,
>>> + const char *oldpass, int howmany, int debug UNUSED)
>>> {
>>> char opasswd_tmp[] = TMP_PASSWORDS_FILE;
>>> struct stat opasswd_stat;
>> Why do you need to change these names along with --enable-static-modules
>> fix?
> There is a conflict with save_old_password function as it is implemented
> in both pam_unix and pam_pwhistory modules.
OK for me then. Could you add a ChangeLog-style entry to your commit
message, as suggested by README-hacking file?
Attachment contains the patch. Check for the correctness. Do I need to
do the same things with other patches related to 'static-build' fixes?
Have you reviewed them?