On Fri, 2019-11-15 at 10:23 +0100, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 15, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> how should we move forward with the GitHUB issue 143?
>
> We have these options:
>
> 1. Add new API call pam_start_ex adding a path parameter.
>
> 2. Add new API call pam_set_feature that allows enabling the
> service to
> be a full path to a service configuration file by a global or
> better a
> thread-local variable.
1 and 2 are both fine for me.
OK, I'll start working on the option 1 when I get some free time
(probably in December).
> 3. Allow the service to be a full path unconditionally
In principal I have not that problem with it, but I would feel much
better if I could remember what the problem with full path services
files was ...
Thorsten
> In all these cases the remaining thing to resolve is what should be
> the
> contents of PAM_SERVICE item and what should be the base directory
> for
> include and substack directives i.e. whether if they are specified
> without a path they should be searched for inside the path
> established
> by the above call from application or not.
>
> I am willing to implement 1 or 3 and I am not going to block a
> patch
> implementing 2 if someone else wants to do it.
--
Tomáš Mráz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
Turkish proverb
[You'll know whether the road is wrong if you carefully listen to your
conscience.]