Re: Bug#1068017: util-linux: please ship liblastlog2 packages

Chris Hofstaedtler <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.alioth.pkg-shadow,gmane.linux.debian.devel.ssh
Message-ID <o4jl22oi5olegwn47c3hnu7k5dyglu35lahm7ymcamicbpg7fg@2yv4mv2wjmvv>
* Colin Watson <[email protected]> [240408 10:55]:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 09:19:09AM +0200, Iker Pedrosa wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 11:48 PM Chris Hofstaedtler <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > util-linux upstream provides three binary objects to be built:
> > > - liblastlog2.so
> > > - pam_lastlog2.so
> > > - lastlog2 (program)
> > >
> > > Debian's PAM policy says to put PAM modules into their own package,
> > > thus libpam-lastlog2. liblastlog2.so would go into the
> > >
> > liblastlog2(-0) package. The lastlog2 program either into its own
> > > lastlog2 package, or elsewhere.
> > >
> > 
> > Please, let's call this pam_lastlog2 and not libpam-lastlog2. AFAIK, all
> > pam modules start with the prefix pam_*.
> 
> The file names do, but the package names almost always start with
> "libpam-".  (Also, Debian package names may not contain "_".)
> 
>   $ apt-file search security/pam_ | grep -v libpam-modules | grep --count ^libpam-
>   68
>   $ apt-file search security/pam_ | grep -v libpam-modules | grep --count ^pam-
>   1
> 
> And the Debian PAM mini-policy says:
> 
>   1) Packages should use the naming scheme of `libpam-<name>' (eg.
>   libpam-ldap).

Indeed. To clarify, because I think there is still some ongoing
confusion regarding binary files and binary packages, here a table:

Debian package name  | (primary) file(s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
liblastlog2-0        | /usr/lib/.../liblastlog2.so.*
libpam-lastlog2      | /usr/lib/.../pam_lastlog2.so
lastlog2             | /usr/bin/lastlog2 (probably + symlink "last")

I think my biggest open questions for the packaging itself are:

* Which package will pull in lastlog2 and libpam-lastlog2, for
  for upgrades from bookworm?

* Should /usr/bin/lastlog2 be in a separate lastlog2 package or not?

* Should lastlog2 Depend: libpam-lastlog2? Vice versa? Only
  Recommends?

Chris


_______________________________________________
Pkg-shadow-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-shadow-devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.