On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 02:39:57PM +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> On Út, 2015-03-31 at 14:04 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the last Linux-PAM release is now 1,5 year ago, since then we
> > made quite some code changes and the bug tracker looks pretty
> > good, means 3 enhancement requests and one defect are left.
> >
> > So I would like to release a Linux-PAM 1.2.0 version during the
> > next days.
> >
> > Any opinions?
>
> Yes, I agree. Do we have such enhancements in the git that warrant the
> 1.2.0 name?
Beside the huge amount of changes (where I already think they are too
much for minor 1.1.8->1.1.9 move), we have:
- Alternativ vendor configuration files
- lot of changes of libpam, including new functions.
(Ok, what to do with the "1.1.9" symbols? Correctly, we would
need to change that to 1.2.0 ...)
There is just one such symbol (LIBPAM_MODUTIL_1.1.9) with one function
(pam_modutil_sanitize_helper_fds) introduced by commit
b0ec5d1e472a0cd74972bfe9575dcf6a3d0cad1c more than a year ago.
It's been used in distribution releases and therefore
shouldn't be changed regardless of the release name.
--
ldv