Bug#440955: bug more severe than 'important'

[Josselin Mouette]

On sam, 2008-01-19 at 13:24 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote:
> Hi Loïc,
> 
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:35:57AM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote:
> > > It seems odd that changing the pam library breaks it. IMHO it should
> > > work with either, since login works with both.
> >  It's a nice feature of login that it works with both, but
> >  gnome-screensaver did not ever work with this other pam library, so
> >  this requires some porting / fixes / compromises; so it's certainly not
> >  "serious" or "grave".
> 
> Could you please send the problem report upstream then?  It is
> surprising that gnome-screensaver just does not cope with `normal' PAM
> setups.  I just converted to pam-unix2 and gnome-screensaver did not
> cope with neither thinkfinger nor pam-unix2, so I had to kill it off.
> 
> It should use PAM just like the other programs (not using sudo as an
> example, though).

I still don’t understand why you think this is a bug in
gnome-screensaver and not in pam_unix2. If this PAM module really
requires the binary to be setgid shadow (as what was initially
proposed), then the problem is a broken design in pam_unix2.

-- 
 .''`.
: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20080120/a937e18e/attachment.pgp