[Bug 962560] Re: pam-auth-update Account-Type should be Additional

2012-04-12 Thread James Page
** Changed in: libpam-ldap (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided = Medium ** Changed in: pam (Ubuntu) Importance: Undecided = Medium -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to libpam-ldap in Ubuntu.

[Bug 962560] Re: pam-auth-update Account-Type should be Additional

2012-03-26 Thread Russ Allbery
This analysis looks right to me, and I think may run deeper than just this one module. If every account module should be additional and not primary, I think that points to an error in the data model or interpretation of the data model, rather than in individual PAM configurations. And viewing

[Bug 962560] Re: pam-auth-update Account-Type should be Additional

2012-03-26 Thread Russ Allbery
Ah, in fact, I see comment #20 mentioned above is from Steve. Steve, when would you ever want to have an account type of Primary given those semantics? Shouldn't Primary just be treated the same as Additional for the account stack? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member