Why does shadow need a patch?

Jim Gifford lfs at jg555.com
Tue Jan 17 21:42:35 PST 2006


Chris Staub wrote:
> The shadow installation in {C}LFS has a patch to "fix" the issue of 
> pam, auditing, and selinux support being enabled by default. Shadow 
> seems to compile just fine without the patch if I just add 
> "--without-selinux --without-libpam --without-audit" to configure. Is 
> there any reason for patching instead of just using switches to the 
> configure command?
Chris go ahead on update with out the patch, 4.0.13 would fail with out 
the patch, that's the reason the patch was created. But as you stated to 
me before 4.0.14 works fine with out it.

-- 
------
jim at linuxfromscratch.org
lfs at jg555.com

LFS User # 2577
Registered Linux User # 299986




More information about the cross-lfs mailing list