[Russ Allbery] > Hm. I'm a little nervous about doing this as a stable update > because it's the sort of thing that one doesn't change in stable. > The change would break people who were relying on the default to > synchronize passwords. I added a NEWS.Debian entry for it when I > changed it in unstable, and changes in behavior at the level of a > NEWS.Debian entry seem like they wouldn't meet the criteria for a > stable update.
I can understand your reluctance, but believe the current default is simply broken for most users of the package. :/ > Would a backport be sufficient? I should be able to backport the > package without too much difficulty, although I have to unwind the > multiarch changes. A backport would not really help us. Then we would have to maintain it in our repository. It is probably less work for us to divert the pam-configs file and only have to maintain one small file to activate the change. I'll test this approach if an update to Squeeze is out of the question. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
