On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 02:35:07PM +1200, James Sleeman wrote: > On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:29 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > that would be one thing; but I don't see any reason why Debian should be > > expected to support passwd-only systems. > When I installed this debian system, many years ago it must be said, I > was given the OPTION of using shadow passwords if I wished to do so, at > the time (and mostly presently) I wished not to do so, for my own > reasons. If Debian still gives that as an OPTION then packages > shouldn't really expect that OPTION being chosen, unless there is a way > that packages can specify a dependancy on shadow passwords so that they > won't even attempt to install without them, then I think that Debian > packages must not simply break when people do not pick the OPTION in the > install process. > Of course, as I say, it's been a long time since I've done a debian > install, so maybe shadow is no longer optional but a requirement. In > that case, fine. Yes, it's no longer an option. We should of course still support an upgrade path for systems whose admins opted not to use shadow passwords, but I think we should do that by auto-converting to shadow rather than supporting the limited semantics of shadowless systems. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
