[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Is it something I said? re:locking

From: Dan Mahoney, System Admin
Subject: Is it something I said? re:locking
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 02:16:38 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)


I apologize if I've argued a bit fervently in the past for what I felt was a simple feature (i.e. support for screen to also use the "attach" password as a "lock" password on systems that do not support either pam or getpass() and thus have no way of knowing what password to otherwise use to lock the screen.)

I feel like I may have overexplained things, or maybe in speaking to a linux crowd that's somehow used to pam working, have needled out my edge-case.

At any rate, I got zero replies after a certain point.

Maybe it was my over-explaining, maybe my tone came across as talking-down, and maybe I just sounded like a loon.

What I am asking for is a patch of likely less-than-five-lines that will not change any behavior for people outside this edge case (since it's within "#ifndef pam"). I can't write the patch, but I'd at least appreciate being told "you're hosed, go push a rope" or something similar, if such is the case.


-Dan Mahoney


--------Dan Mahoney--------
Techie,  Sysadmin,  WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC
ICQ: 13735144   AIM: LarpGM

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]