Subject: [bug#72316] [PATCH v2 2/3] Add a guile-pam-module service.

From: Felix Lechner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 11:03:47 -0700

Hi Z572,

On Fri, May 02 2025, Z572 wrote:

> i think should use (@ (srfi srfi-1) every), not map, otherwise this has
> always been #t. And should use `file-like?', friendly to inferior packages.

You are probably right.  Please feel free to adjust the validator.

I personally do not use the configuration-record's type checking
features anymore.  I will present my configuration system, which also
disentangles the painful splicing of values into the command line, soon.

> If I understand correctly, all guile-pam-modules share the same
> pam_guile and dependencies, can we restrict this so that each different
> pam-module is its own separate dependency

I do not understand your sentence (and am not sure it's true).  The
Guile prerequisites are for the modules your users write.

> (If possible in the future, I would even like to compile each of them to
> wasm separately, limiting the capabilities even more.)

I am a fan of WASM.  What does it have to do with Guile-PAM, please?

> looks like this patch depends on https://issues.guix.gnu.org/72316#10 ?.

Yeah, that happened because I wrote the service to integrate Guile-PAM
into the existing Guix stack.  It quickly proved superior, however, to
use Guile-PAM's stack, which is nearly identical. [1][2]

An easy solution would be to merge patches two and three into a single
patch.

Kind regards
Felix

[1]
https://juix.org/guile-pam/#Skipping-of-actions-on-PAM_005fIGNORE_002e
[2] https://juix.org/guile-pam/#Legacy-instruction-sets