Subject: Problems with wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.patch

From: "AMAN, ALICE L. (JSC-GT)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 15:58:12 -0500

I have only installed a couple of patches before. I must be doing something
wrong. My system (let's call oscar)  is a Redhat Linux "hybrid" with the
bare minimum from Redhat because I usually like to install the separate
applications when possible myself. I turned on shadow password using
"pwconv".  I think this means I'm running "PAM"? In any event, the "shadow
password" function
is working well.

  Step 0. I installed wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.tar.gz without any patch,
encountered no errors during compilation or install. But am getting a "login
failure" when trying to connect from another system (we'll call spooky).
 The remote system, Spooky, reflects the following error in the secure log
": execv /usr/sbin/in.identd: No such file or directory ". Spooky can
connect to my other linux systems running Wu-FTPD vr14 without a problem.
 step 1.  I copied to oscar a fresh copy of wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.tar.gz.
 step 2.  Unzipped and un tarred resulting in new directory being created
again with all files. Looks good.
.step 3 Then I downloaded the wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.patch and deposited it in
the same directory, i.e. wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.
 step 4 I reviewed the patch file noting numerous lines of code many of
which appear to have the intent of adding PAM options to the Makefile.lnx
file. 
step 5 From the wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17 directory, I tried to patch by entering:
(on a Linux kernel 2.0.36)
    patch -p0 < wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17.patch
Step 6 Answered "n" which was the default to the numerous queries.
Step 7.  Reviewed resulting makefiles/Makefile.lnx and no PAM options added.
Step 8 Started over again by deleting the newly created directory moving a
new copy of the wu-ftp tar file into /usr/local/src, untarring once again.
Moving a copy of the patch file to the new wu-ftpd-2.4.2-vr17 directory and
applying it once again.
Step 9 This time, I answered "Y" to the numerous queries. 
Step 10 Reviewed results and still no PAM options added to Makefile.lnx.

Does any of the above reflect the correct appliation of the patch?
Are my expections of seeing PAM options added to Makefile.lnx misguided?