From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37105) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iFR8y-0007wJ-RA for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 19:01:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFR8u-0002QD-Hf for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 19:01:20 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54601) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iFR8h-0002Ll-5L for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 19:01:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iFR8g-00019j-VV for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2019 19:01:03 -0400 Subject: [bug#37405] [PATCH] Services: Check and modify gdm-password in pam-limits Resent-Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 01:00:32 +0200 From: Danny Milosavljevic Message-ID: <20191002010032.1f01e2b0@scratchpost.org> In-Reply-To: <461364c376c0c54f0bfff80ed7727d182400671f.camel@gmail.com> References: <14cd3e26c2dae4de79a2bc87fb8614c8f737e629.camel@gmail.com> <461364c376c0c54f0bfff80ed7727d182400671f.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_/bNbg7G.MCo3vu8RSWpOxoPy"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Jesse Gibbons Cc: 37405@debbugs.gnu.org --Sig_/bNbg7G.MCo3vu8RSWpOxoPy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, thanks for the patch. I'm not thrilled about that approach (arguably Guix already does it wrong anyway). But since the manual of pam_limits does describe that one should use it like that, I have applied it as a stop-gap fix to guix master as commit 0bf7d34d77ffca40be9e04586195054e9f2c7a13. Long term, we should really make pam entries first class and show up in the operating-system record--that's what they are FOR: to let the administrator (and thus the organization) choose how they want to do user authorization/session handling etc. Why do we decide for them? Bug report kept open for obvious reasons. --Sig_/bNbg7G.MCo3vu8RSWpOxoPy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEds7GsXJ0tGXALbPZ5xo1VCwwuqUFAl2T2pAACgkQ5xo1VCww uqWlngf/UKMtNSKEbEGkkUEDqY0mx4JorRQJ9TQr3rc1EJzmudieoz8JScnRYF4M Nm7JIbroSuxZNbtx9TIJD+gbJdySrc57u6xTaY7TVlGthtgamYuLh9HSKEb/z0WS sGV5C/5qqVdQqyNMOS/D+DSb+Yk4BA98F9FAzB79AYEUR6xNNaNPPTboO5exG7/B ZWnhmfQt890pNPD5Ik0RaAG1zCr+9ZbD+qyDqKxIF79JQzW/gGARagqgAeGFCTS1 75kqqVaFBb2ISjgqyajsl60iKm/+sWMq14KeSczYt/GrbvI3luYw31SKJCcU9Y3B YkfVjpUljE1CG1AtJIg4r78LWeqbHQ== =DZSK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/bNbg7G.MCo3vu8RSWpOxoPy--