[fprint] pam_fprint 0.2: some improvements

[Diego Zuccato]

Pavel Herrmann ha scritto:

> Please don't think I don't appreciate your work on pam_fprint, but isn't 
> it better to make patches against latest GIT version?
Well, it really should. But I still have to learn to use GIT :-(
Making it work with multiple fingers was a high priority work, for me.
Now I can look at GIT to send another patch, maybe w/ some extra cleanup 
(I left all the old code in place, "just in case").
If others are interested, I can refiff against latest git, but if I'm 
the only one interested...

Anyway, before proceeding, I'd like feedback on some assumptions I made:
1) it's ok that, if pam requires authenticating w/ X>Y prints and user 
enrolled just Y prints (w/ available readers), access is DENIED
2) any user could have prints enrolled from multiple readers
3) it is OK *not* to short-circuit a print recognition (so if X prints 
are required, X prints are scanned, even if the first fails)
4) it's OK to only return PAM_SUCCESS and PAM_AUTH_ERR (no more 
PAM_AUTHINFO_UNAVAIL)
5) (obvious) there are no objections to the proposed options (and no 
evident bugs, like in the first proposed patch)

Another thing I'd like to implement is handling a "fixed fingers list" 
so that different apps can require different fingers to be scanned. This 
  could remove one implication (nfingers => randomlist), but adds 
another (len(flist) >= nfingers, and if strictly greater the others are 
chosen at random).

BYtE,
  Diego.