From owner-freebsd-doc Mon Feb 24 14:55:35 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A035E37B401; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:55:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from rhadamanth.submonkey.net (pc2-cdif2-5-cust35.cdif.cable.ntl.com [81.101.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE14043F85; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 14:55:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from setantae@submonkey.net) Received: from setantae by rhadamanth.submonkey.net with local (Exim 4.12) id 18nRVS-000167-00; Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:55:30 +0000 Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:55:30 +0000 From: Ceri Davies To: David Schultz Cc: doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: removing unimplemented options from login.conf.5 Message-ID: <20030224225530.GA4107@submonkey.net> Mail-Followup-To: Ceri Davies , David Schultz , doc@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20030224223718.GB9747@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030224223718.GB9747@HAL9000.homeunix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 02:37:18PM -0800, David Schultz wrote: > This has been a thorn in my side for some time now. A large chunk > of the options listed in the login.conf(5) manpage are poorly > documented, and aren't even supported in the base system. My > original intent was to add a sentence saying that some of them are > supported in ports, but referring to ports from a system manpage > is kludgy, and I could only find one option supported in ports > anyway. So my new plan is to simply nix from login.conf(5) all of > the options that don't work. What do people think of the > following patch (which has some other stuff in it as well)? If the options are really unlikely to get implemented, then I'd support this move. Possibly part of the reason that they are there is to try to convince someone(tm) to implement them. From a (very) quick scan of the diff below, it looks good (although -STABLE doesn't seem to have pam_passwdqc, so please bear that in mind if/when this is MFC'd). Ceri -- User: DO YOU ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST AS YOUR PERSONAL LORD AND SAVIOR? Iniaes: Sure, I can accept all forms of payment. -- www.chatterboxchallenge.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message