On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Neil Zanella wrote:
> Well, shouldn't linuxconf at least pop up a warning saying:
> "failed: shadow password not enabled"
> or something like that. After all, linuxconf is meant to be user friendly.
>
> Plus, can't Linuxconf just proceed as follows? :
>
> 1) Check whether shadow password is enabled or not
>
> 2) If not enabled put an asterisk at the beginning of the password field
> in /etc/passwd
>
> 3) Otherwise procede as usual.
>
> I think this would be a smart way for Linuxconf to operate.
>
> Do we need a patch for this?
Well, yes and no. This is a bug that is only visible on system using PAM
(and where linuxconf uses PAM). We have to fix the bug, not disable the
feature :-(
> > and then you will be able to disable accounts and do much more. The user
> > account dialog will be enlarge with new fields.
>
> Thanks. I hope that non shadow password accounts will eventualy be supported.
Yes it will. But I still wonder why people are using non shadow password ?
I have a patch for that btw that I have to test
---------------------------------------------------------
Jacques Gelinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Check out Linuxconf at http://www.solucorp.qc.ca/linuxconf
New modules: mgettyconf, managerpm
---
You are currently subscribed to linuxconf as: [[email protected]]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
