pam itself doesn't require systemd, but pam-32bit requires systemd-32bit? (systemd-32bit if systemd) might be a better option.

Also, systemd(-32bit) already requires pam(-32bit), so this is a cyclic dependency. I don't think that's possible to avoid though.

Why limit to just i586? For other architectures this is still valid FWICT.

The problem is not a 32 bit systemd but a 32 bit application running on a(n otherwise) 64 bit system. In that case, the 32 bit PAM may want to load the 32 bit pam_systemd.so which is the only file in the 32 bit systemd compatibility package. Without the dependency, there would not be a 32 bit pam_systemd.so but a 64 bit systemd which has a 64 bit pam_systemd.so.

Fabian Vogt (favogt) - over 3 years ago

Which is why I suggested (systemd-32bit if systemd), because if systemd isn't installed, you also won't need systemd-32bit.

This is the same topic for basically all PAM modules in external packages, which handle that themselves usually by having Supplements: packageand(foo:pam-<targettype>) in their baselibs.conf, see pam_kwallet or gnome-keyring-pam.