Randy McMurchy wrote:
But can't the same thing be said for many of the LFS packages. :-)
Heh, you are correct sir. :)
It is hard to give good arguments for this question. I cannot argue
that it isn't a useful library, and I use cracklib on every LFS system I
build, but I install pam as well, following the BLFS instructions. I
just think most users go on to BLFS after LFS anyways, and there is a
whole section on security right at the beginning. Then can install
cracklib,pam and shadow together. The instructions for installing
cracklib+shadow-pam could just be a note in BLFS saying, "install shadow
exactly as in LFS adding the "--enable-cracklib" (or whatever the flag
is called) flag."
Justin
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
