On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 18:09 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 10:16:46AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > forwarded 223280 https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3240
> > thanks
> 
> > > Don't worry about me for this bug; I actually stopped using Samba a year 
> > > or so ago. However, unless somebody else's added a similar feature, my 
> > > patch (or a recode, which may be easier) would probably still be nice in 
> > > Samba.
> 
> > > So, feel free to forward the patch to the Samba development list, if you 
> > > want, but don't spend too much time dealing with it.
> 
> > The patch seems barely adaptable to current sources.
> 
> > However, as I'm no in the position of judging whether such feature is
> > relevant or not, I reported this to upstream as is.
> 
> > If I receive comments from upstream, I'll forward them here.
> 
> FWIW, the reason this patch was never applied/forwarded before was because
> I'm not convinced it's necessary; it's trivial to preload user entries into
> the smbpasswd database with disabled passwords if that's what the admin
> wants, without any requirement to modify pam_smbpass in this manner, and
> it's arguably less error-prone to do so, at which point pam_smbpass does
> what's expected without any further modifications.

Sounds like a good reason to kill it to me.

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                http://samba.org/~abartlet/
Authentication Developer, Samba Team           http://samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College  http://hawkerc.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to