On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 08:56:51AM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Yes. PAM is used for user authentication and authorisation, and is
> integral to the operation of schroot. Given that schroot runs setuid
> root to do what it does, I would be reluctant to write an alternative
> to replace the PAM fun
Barry deFreese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Roger Leigh wrote:
>> Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> I'm curious: What will happen on the hurd-i386 architecture? Last time
>>> I checked fakeroot did not work well enough to be used on an autobuilder.
>>> Will sbuild need to be patche
Roger Leigh wrote:
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Roger Leigh wrote:
2. Security (and Extensibility)
---
[remove sudo support for security, and use schroot to manage chroots]
[remove building on host]
I'm cu
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>> > 2. Security (and Extensibility)
>> > ---
>> >
>> [remove sudo support for security, and use schroot to manage chroots]
>> [remove building on host]
>
> I'm curious: What will happe
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>> > 2. Security (and Extensibility)
>> > ---
>> >
>> [remove sudo support for security, and use schroot to manage chroots]
>> [remove building on host]
>
> I'm curious: What will happe
Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (09/04/2007):
> I'm curious: What will happen on the hurd-i386 architecture? Last time
> I checked fakeroot did not work well enough to be used on an
> autobuilder. Will sbuild need to be patched (more than before) for it
> to work at all?
AFAICT from my past exp
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > 2. Security (and Extensibility)
> > ---
> >
> [remove sudo support for security, and use schroot to manage chroots]
> [remove building on host]
I'm curious: What will happen on the hurd-i386 architecture? Last time
I checked f
7 matches
Mail list logo
