[RFC] Add CrackLib to Chapter 6 LFS
archaic at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Aug 4 22:18:11 PDT 2005
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 12:01:16AM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I respect your opinion that it isn't needed, however, it would be
> much easier to understand if you gave just *one* reason why you
> think it wouldn't be a good thing.
I have already stated it. There is no *technical* reason for including
it in a base development system. That is enough for me. Your reasons for
including it are accurate, but you are disregarding the fact that it is
*not* necessary. This screams of hint material, which would truly be a
BTW, out of the 70-odd boxes I manage, I would use (and do use) cracklib
on exactly one of them. That box also uses PAM, so even it would be
But alas, I am not speaking from personal needs as I would add several
BLFS packages to LFS as well as remove a few. I am trying to see this
objectively and that forces me to see this as perfect hint material with
a link in the book because, frankly, this *is* an optional package. If I
understood your posts in this thread accurately, you do not care for
tagging packages as optional in the book. I don't either (for LFS). As
such, cracklib has already disqualified itself on that basis.
Want control, education, and security from your operating system?
Hardened Linux From Scratch
More information about the lfs-dev