GNU bug report logs -
#72316
[PATCH 0/3] Switch to Guile-PAM.
Previous Next
Full log
Message #77 received at 72316 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
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
This bug report was last modified 88 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.