Steve Langasek wrote: > Given that all the files involved were conffiles prior to this > transition, I think no additional work is needed to correctly support > systems that are being upgraded. Can you confirm whether > /etc/pam.d/other already contains 'md5' on the machine above? If not, > I'll add that to the top of the TODO list.
Yes it would contain md5 on the password line. > A decision still needs to be made about which package should be asking > the question, I think. Policy would normally require that > libpam-runtime is the only package editing any of these files; and > indeed, since the passwd package is not essential, it is conceivable to > have a system with libpam-runtime installed but not passwd, and the > question would still be relevant for other services that allow password > changes. Are there problems with using debconf from a package that's in > the dependency chain of login (an essential package)? If so, this would > also pose a problem with trying to poll debconf values to fix > /etc/pam.d/other on upgrade. debconf is itself "only" important (and it will never be essential). However there are ways to use debconf that don't require a dependency on it. -- see shy jo
pgpqSUA0cdNl2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
