I'm not sure I can reconstruct the argument from the inlined content
of this email.
I recall that the path that we take through the chain of modules needs
to persist otherwise replay of the stack doesn't follow the same path
which will completely confuse the admin. That being said, if a module
is, itself, confused enough to not support replaying the stack, I
think I wanted to let it complain in a way that could be heard.
I am unfamiliar with this grantor thing.
Without digging further, does that help explain what the code is/was doing?
Cheers
Andrew
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Tomas Mraz <tmraz(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Čt, 2014-09-18 at 21:07 -0700, Andrew G. Morgan wrote:
> Well I'm still reachable. It's just been a long while.... .75 must have
> been released in the 90s.
>
> Where is the official PAM repository these days?
Hello Andrew,
it is currently on Fedorahosted servers.
The main page of the project is here:
https://fedorahosted.org/linux-pam/
and the git repository is here:
http://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/linux-pam.git/
--
Tomas Mraz
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
Turkish proverb
(You'll never know whether the road is wrong though.)