LinuxQuestions.org
Welcome to the most active Linux Forum on the web.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


View Poll Results: Should future versions of Slackware include PAM?
Yes, future versions of Slackware should include PAM. 54 38.30%
No, don't include PAM in Slackware. 54 38.30%
Isn't PAM already married to Bobby? 33 23.40%
Voters: 141. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
  Search this Thread
Old 02-07-2015, 04:52 PM   #1
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,444

Rep: Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124
[Poll] Should future versions of Slackware include Linux-PAM?


Hi,

The subject has already been discussed to some extent, but here's the corresponding poll.

Slackware is one of the very few Linux distributions that doesn't ship PAM. While the absence of PAM may be of no consequence to the average desktop user or even the administrator of simple Slackware servers (LAMP, simple file servers, etc.), it's actually a showstopper to all those of us who'd like to use Slackware for tasks like secure LDAP-based central authentication, where PAM is a requirement.

Judging from the actual state of things, implementing PAM would only offer advantages. Those of us who are currently using RHEL, CentOS, SLES or Debian could make the move to Slackware for "enterprise" tasks. The presence of PAM under the hood will likely go completely unnoticed for the casual desktop user. As for the casual Slackware server admin, he or she will have to add the odd line to the relevant configuration file. No dramatic changes, and only a significant benefit for server administrators.
 
Old 02-07-2015, 05:03 PM   #2
TracyTiger
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2011
Location: California, USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 528

Rep: Reputation: 272Reputation: 272Reputation: 272
I don't need PAM in Slackware but I'm not against having in included.

I vote for Option # 4 - Let PV decide. Whatever PV decides is fine with me.

Last edited by TracyTiger; 02-07-2015 at 05:37 PM. Reason: Rephrased ... and finally figured out strikethrough
 
8 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:04 PM   #3
qweasd
Member
 
Registered: May 2010
Posts: 620

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I take it, the 3-rd option is for those who don't care one way or the other. Nice to see reasonable poll options for a change
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:08 PM   #4
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,444

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124
Quote:
Originally Posted by qweasd View Post
I take it, the 3-rd option is for those who don't care one way or the other. Nice to see reasonable poll options for a change
I bluntly admit that everytime I write something like "include PAM under the hood", the mental image of young Victoria Principal in the trunk of my car flashes briefly before my eyes.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:16 PM   #5
arfon
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 239

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
I don't need PAM and it's a bit intrusive, so NO (with a caveat). The caveat being that I'm not against PAM either, if you want it, go for it.

There's no reason that PAM and PAM compatible package slackbuilds couldn't be built and added to Slackbuilds-

MEANING: If you want PAM, man up and make the Slackbuild and share, don't throw a poll up and try and strong-arm Pat into more work.

I'm not saying this in a dick way, I'm just trying to point out that here's an opportunity for you (meaning users) to help out in a big way.

Last edited by arfon; 02-07-2015 at 05:23 PM.
 
6 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:22 PM   #6
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,444

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124
Quote:
Originally Posted by arfon View Post
MEANING: If you want PAM, man up and make the Slackbuild and share, don't throw a poll up and try and strong-arm Pat into more work.
Doing this is simply too much work, since it involves rebuilding and maintaining a significant number of base Slackware packages. On a side note, if you don't think I'm man enough for the task, let me point out that I'm the maintainer of a Slackware package repository that holds 402 packages on the latest count.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:25 PM   #7
arfon
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Texas
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 239

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
"significant number of base Slackware packages" - EXACTLY! but Pat provides all of the base Slackbuilds so halfthe work is already done.

AlienBOB has no problem doing this for MULTILIB packages.

It's not that I don't think you're man enough to do it, I'm not pointing at you specifically. I'm trying to point out to ANY user who thinks that X should change to Y because they want it, that they have the ability to do it without burdening the (volunteer) devs with more work.


If you want a simple answer to your poll- I vote NO. I don't need it, have never needed it, can't see a future need for it and it just introduces potential instabilities/vulnerabilities/dependencies

But, may I point out that you are polling a group of people who are living fine without it and therefore don't miss it so your results will probably be skewed in the "NO" direction.

Last edited by arfon; 02-07-2015 at 05:31 PM.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-07-2015, 05:29 PM   #8
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,444

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124
Quote:
Originally Posted by arfon View Post
"significant number of base Slackware packages" - EXACTLY! but Pat provides all of the base Slackbuilds so halfthe work is already done.

AlienBOB has no problem doing this for MULTILIB packages.
As one of your ex-presidents (a Texan like you) once said: don't misunderestimate me.
 
Old 02-07-2015, 05:41 PM   #9
m-h
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2010
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 16

Rep: Reputation: 9
We authenticate against a Kolab2-based LDAP directory without PAM on any machine (despite the name 'nss-pam-ldapd' doesn't need PAM). Exim for example is a pain to configure for LDAP-authentication, but it's possible. Perhaps there are applications which require PAM, but saying PAM is required in general is just wrong.

Mike
 
Old 02-07-2015, 05:46 PM   #10
kikinovak
MLED Founder
 
Registered: Jun 2011
Location: Montpezat (South France)
Distribution: CentOS, OpenSUSE
Posts: 3,444

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124Reputation: 2124
Quote:
Originally Posted by m-h View Post
We authenticate against a Kolab2-based LDAP directory without PAM on any machine (despite the name 'nss-pam-ldapd' doesn't need PAM). Exim for example is a pain to configure for LDAP-authentication, but it's possible. Perhaps there are applications which require PAM, but saying PAM is required in general is just wrong.

Mike
You mean Linux-PAM was only included for fun here?

http://www.bisdesign.ca/ivandi/slackware/PAM/
 
Old 02-07-2015, 05:52 PM   #11
vtel57
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware64 - 14.2 w/ Xfce
Posts: 1,502

Rep: Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414Reputation: 414
Have no need for it on my personal systems, so... don't care.
 
Old 02-07-2015, 06:22 PM   #12
LysergicFacet
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Moonbase 1.
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
NO.

Here's the thing. One of the selling points of Slackware is the basic install does not overdo itself with every bell and whistle. This is left largely to the third party groups that add packages and package management systems (alienBob, etc).

If PAM is included by default, why not GRUB? Why not any arbitrary package that someone might find a user for? If it isn't needed to have a stable and running linux install that will allow you to install whatever you want (including a PAM system), then I do not think it should be added.

I do not see one, single, reason why this should be included in the base install. Not one person has come up with a reason other than "in some relatively remote situations it would make my life easier."

While this is a valid reason to make a slackbuild, et al for such a situation, this is not a reason to include something in the base install. Half of the reason Slackware hasn't been bloated beyond sanity as Debian/Ubuntu, RedHat, and others is the avoidance of this type of thing.

I say slackbuild it. Same relative amount of effort without pooping all over the idea of Slackware.

EDIT:

Furthermore, these words bother me.

"simple Slackware servers"

This means Slackware that doesn't run LDAP. This likely means most Slackware servers. I have no numbers to look at for this, but a single use case amonst many is not a reason for fundamental additions.

"Judging from the actual state of things, implementing PAM would only offer advantages. Those of us who are currently using RHEL, CentOS, SLES or Debian could make the move to Slackware for "enterprise" tasks."

I would like to know (I don't mean this to sound combative) what the 'actual state of things' means. I would love for this to be a rather elaborate reply since this seems to be the main point behind why PAM should be included.

Last edited by LysergicFacet; 02-07-2015 at 06:26 PM.
 
Old 02-07-2015, 06:27 PM   #13
LysergicFacet
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Moonbase 1.
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
My post seems to have been dissapeared. It was a NO vote. Any ideas, anyone, where it went?
 
Old 02-07-2015, 06:33 PM   #14
astrogeek
Moderator
 
Registered: Oct 2008
Distribution: Slackware [64]-X.{0|1|2|37|-current} ::12<=X<=14, FreeBSD_12{.0|.1}
Posts: 5,778
Blog Entries: 23

Rep: Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786Reputation: 3786
Quote:
Originally Posted by LysergicFacet View Post
My post seems to have been dissapeared. It was a NO vote. Any ideas, anyone, where it went?
Welcome to LQ!

Sometimes a new user's early posts can take a few minutes to pass through the spam filters, or be queued for moderation. It will probably reappear soon.
 
Old 02-07-2015, 06:35 PM   #15
LysergicFacet
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2015
Location: Moonbase 1.
Distribution: Slackware64
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrogeek View Post
Welcome to LQ!

Sometimes a new user's early posts can take a few minutes to pass through the spam filters, or be queued for moderation. It will probably reappear soon.
I've lurked for years. Figured I would get involved with all this as most of the other linux distros went to hell. I appreciate the response. I don't think I've used a forum system for almost ten years, so everyone please forgive my oldness.
 
  


Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Planning to install Slackware-14.0 or future versions from floppy disks, anyone? Didier Spaier Slackware 2 01-20-2013 06:01 AM
Should future releases of Slackware include ESR versions of Firefox and Thunderbird ? kikinovak Slackware 49 12-30-2012 03:29 AM
include path for multiple versions of gcc hydrogeek Linux - General 5 11-18-2007 03:08 PM
Poll On User-friendly Versions Of Linux ALK360 General 18 01-27-2005 06:13 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration