[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ec7187ecbdf1f2e6b961f3f7aff490df@exys.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 20:45:24 +0200
From: aep <aep@...s.org>
To: <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: make -i with linux-pam
> They might be _used to_ it working, but that doesn't
> necessarily mean they "want" it.
Heh, this is where the difference in mindset shows. I tend to think
people using things, actually want them.
> With that said, one acceptable approach might be to have utmp/wtmp
> support exist, but silently bail out (reporting success) if the file
> does not exist.
having utmp in libc is just so utterly wrong in the first place.
This really belongs in the higher stack, where decisions like that can
be made based on config files.
Maybe some admins want to log ips, maybe some just usernames, some
prefer binary logs, some prefer cleartext, etc..
Sounds like an interesting problem for your platform vision :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
