[SOLVED] [Poll] Should future versions of Slackware include Linux-PAM?
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
View Poll Results: Should future versions of Slackware include PAM?
Yes, future versions of Slackware should include PAM.
you should have already realized that you deal with a lot of fanatics here.
and with people that think nothing useful has been invented since the day of lisp and dam every thing new since than.
most of them of course do not use Slackware for their work, if they do they have very limited requirements,
some of course do not even spend most of their time on Slackware, they sit on Apples and Android or Windows devices, of course without damming them for what they did, some even said even GPL is crap.
but on weekends, when they want enjoy their retro feelings they want to boot into a 'true unix like' Linux, brows the internet, visit forums and tell others how cool they are and what you do not need, and than reboot to windows for play a game or turn off the virtual machine on mac to do whatever.
But Slackware has to stay puristic.
and you asking for technical details and facts.
Spot on. I still think there's a significant part of Slackware users, if not a majority, who prefer Slackware for what it is: a modern, ultra-robust, reliable and flexible OS to get some work done. Besides a few exceptions (RHEL certification), all of my clients are running Slackware on their servers and desktops, they're happy with it, and I'm sleeping well at night because there are no nasty surprises.
On the other hand, there's the sociotope of users that you so vividly describe, and I think they're only a loud minority. Discussing a possible expansion of the OS' capabilities while remaining true to the underlying KISS principle with these Open Source taliban feels like discussing gun laws, religion, abortion or health care with a bunch of rednecks.
Spot on. I still think there's a significant part of Slackware users, if not a majority, who prefer Slackware for what it is: a modern, ultra-robust, reliable and flexible OS to get some work done. Besides a few exceptions (RHEL certification), all of my clients are running Slackware on their servers and desktops, they're happy with it, and I'm sleeping well at night because there are no nasty surprises.
On the other hand, there's the sociotope of users that you so vividly describe, and I think they're only a loud minority. Discussing a possible expansion of the OS' capabilities while remaining true to the underlying KISS principle with these Open Source taliban feels like discussing gun laws, religion, abortion or health care with a bunch of rednecks.
So you start a poll and then argue with everyone who doesn't agree with you, and now anyone who doesn't agree with you is a redneck?
you should have already realized that you deal with a lot of fanatics here.
and with people that think nothing useful has been invented since the day of lisp and dam every thing new since than.
most of them of course do not use Slackware for their work, if they do they have very limited requirements,
some of course do not even spend most of their time on Slackware, they sit on Apples and Android or Windows devices, of course without damming them for what they did, some even said even GPL is crap.
but on weekends, when they want enjoy their retro feelings they want to boot into a 'true unix like' Linux, brows the internet, visit forums and tell others how cool they are and what you do not need, and than reboot to windows for play a game or turn off the virtual machine on mac to do whatever.
But Slackware has to stay puristic.
and you asking for technical details and facts.
When I start with Slackware it was a great distribution to learn Linux.
but Linux is changing, Linux is not anymore what it was.
this might be sad but it is also reality.
If not today, than for sure tomorrow, it will be that if you start with Slackware you will learn Slackware and not Linux,
And you have to live and learn less and less functionality.
Well, it still might be nice for a hobby, for some.
This is what I think will happen if Slackware does not adopt, but f course many here will know it better.
I nominate this post as the most arrogant post, so-far, of 2015.
This poll includes the possibility to vote NO, and to discuss the pros and cons of including PAM based on technical facts. Let me politely point out that you seem to have missed the point.
I didn't vote. There are missing option "I don't care'. For me PAM can be included, if everything will work, without any configuration change, after PAM installation.
So you start a poll and then argue with everyone who doesn't agree with you, and now anyone who doesn't agree with you is a redneck?
Nice.
Arguing means exactly that: advancing arguments.
I started this poll, because I was curious to know what people think about some specific technical aspect of the base distribution, and if it was a reasonable thing to alter it. Weighing the pros and cons. This is exactly what arguing is about.
So far, your main argument is your strong dislike of the person who initiated this poll (me). I can live with that.
You already voted, now you can advance some technical facts. For example, how the inclusion of Linux-PAM would add more specific bugs, or why your present server or desktop configurations would become more complicated. Etc.
---------- Post added 02-09-15 at 03:43 AM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labinnah
I didn't vote. There are missing option "I don't care'. For me PAM can be included, if everything will work, without any configuration change, after PAM installation.
That's what the third option is for. ("Isn't PAM already married to Bobby?")
This entire thread bothers me. First, it is (indirectly) suggested that we agree to have a not insignificant addition/change to Slackware without any real idea on its effects on stability, workflows, et al. Secondly, no one seems to want to start working on this that believes in it (by all means, show me otherwise). There is simply this loud desire without any real care for effects or effort.
Then, of course, it descends to charicaturing (I am going to just imagine this is a word) cultural groups along with a poll at the top of the page that aggregates 80+ votes from...somewhere. Naturally, this poll agrees with the original post.
Am I the only one?
Last edited by LysergicFacet; 02-09-2015 at 02:45 AM.
Bart has the right idea. Kiki if you Ivan and anyone else have resources...
We do not.
if you say you need something integrated in Slackware for your jobs, the best way to achieve it, IMHO, should be to maintain it outside of Slackware, with code (SlackBuilds) and package repositories: this way you can use it in your production environment (with the added value of having the highest level of control on the implementation) and so getting job done (the primary objective, I think), make easy to other to test it, have bug reports but, most important for the eventual future integration, you can show that it works flawlessly.
this is essentially what Eric does with his ktown or his multilib, what the people at GSB do, what willysr and chess do with MSB, what I (think I/am trying to) do (in a smaller scale) with LXDE, or what pretty much everybody that need something integrated beside what's in the standard Slackware do: sometimes proposals get accepted, sometimes not, but in the meantime people still can choose to use this stuff, if they would like to.
if this step lacks (external wide testing) that, IMHO, means Pat should have to do all this work alone and it will certainly be harder for him if he doesn't have a real-world domain where to test PAM stuff...
pushing continuosly on this forum to integrate this stuff without real-life feedback testing, IMHO, has only the result of annoying a lot of forum users (like I think it does the systemd querelle).
I didn't vote. There are missing option "I don't care'. For me PAM can be included, if everything will work, without any configuration change, after PAM installation.
I would largely agree with this sentiment. To me, this suggests an effort of interested parties produce some level of solution as a slackpkg/et al to prove the stability and feasibility of this. Without that, what is to say it will be stable?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponce
pushing continuosly on this forum to integrate this stuff without real-life feedback testing, IMHO, has only the result of annoying a lot of forum users (like I think it does the systemd querelle).
This is a good point. I don't mean to be disrespectful. This type of loud and relentless pushing with care to the wind is how we don't want things. That belongs with the lesser distros like Ubuntu, Debian, and RedHat/CentOS.
Last edited by LysergicFacet; 02-09-2015 at 02:49 AM.
I started this poll, because I was curious to know what people think about some specific technical aspect of the base distribution, and if it was a reasonable thing to alter it. Weighing the pros and cons. This is exactly what arguing is about.
So far, your main argument is your strong dislike of the person who initiated this poll (me). I can live with that.
kikinovak, its pretty hard for you to switch back to the high road after you call people "rednecks" - and now you're the victim?
I forgot one thing: as maintaining a repository like that dedicated to PAM integration involves a lot of resources, there would be no need to say it but it would be appropriate for the lazy slackers that would like to see it integrated to at least test that stuff and report back
That's what the third option is for. ("Isn't PAM already married to Bobby?")
I'm not native english speaker, and didn't get a point of this statement. For me it should be more cleanly marked as "I don't care". IMHO, this "Booby one" is more likely for persons which want to vote, but don't know what about is the question.
if you say you need something integrated in Slackware for your jobs, the best way to achieve it, IMHO, should be to maintain it outside of Slackware, with code (SlackBuilds) and package repositories: this way you can use it in your production environment (with the added value of having the highest level of control on the implementation) and so getting job done (the primary objective, I think), make easy to other to test it, have bug reports but, most important for the eventual future integration, you can show that it works flawlessly.
this is essentially what Eric does with his ktown or his multilib, what the people at GSB do, what willysr and chess do with MSB, what I (think I/am trying to) do (in a smaller scale) with LXDE, or what pretty much everybody that need something integrated beside what's in the standard Slackware do: sometimes proposals get accepted, sometimes not, but in the meantime people still can choose to use this stuff, if they would like to.
if this step lacks (external wide testing) that, IMHO, means Pat should have to do all this work alone and it will certainly be harder for him if he doesn't have a real-world domain where to test PAM stuff...
pushing continuosly on this forum to integrate this stuff without real-life feedback testing, IMHO, has only the result of annoying a lot of forum users (like I think it does the systemd querelle).
Curiously enough, I agree with you on that, ponce. You know I'm no lamer for RTFM and building stuff that isn't included in Slackware. I did quite some reading and experimenting, reading the LFS and BLFS book and building stuff in virtual machines. I gave up on PAM because this is low-level stuff I'm not sufficiently familiar with, and which involves altering some more low-level stuff. My idea was simply that it would be much easier for Pat to do that, since he's the most familiar with these base components. And contrary to GUI assistants, systemd or dependency resolution, I don't think including PAM would be contrary to the distribution's KISS principle. As far as I know, only Slackware and Crux don't include it (correct me if I'm wrong).
If someone provided a third-party PAM-ified repository, I'd be happily using it. It would be very interesting to have Pat's view on that. As far as I can judge from here, it would mean a huge amount of work for a third-party maintainer, but only a relatively small amount of alterations made by the BDFL himself. Hence my initial suggestion and this poll.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
