Bug#304350: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#304350: Here is the patch
On Thu, May 12, 2005 at 12:14:06PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote: this is really easy to fix, and perfectly makes sense. I'd say that we The fact that it makes sense is to be diiscussed. I have already explained zillion of times that the critical priority is meant to minimize questions to the very absolute minimum, so there is a rationale to have the confirmation at high only. For the information, I just launched a windows for the first time after buying it (and the last after repartitionning), and it did ask for an admin password twice, but didnt ask for the user passwd at all. My user don't have any password set by default. Not implying that windows security orientation should be used, but well. If you really don't want to add questions to critical path, I'd do the same as windows does. Bye, Mt. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#304350: Here is the patch
retitle 304350 [DEBIAN DECISION] Please ask twice for passwords, even when DEBCONF_PRIORITY=critical thanks Hello, this is really easy to fix, and perfectly makes sense. I'd say that we should do it and forget about it. The patch is attached. Bye, Mt. Index: shadow-4.0.3/debian/passwd.config === --- shadow-4.0.3.orig/debian/passwd.config 2005-05-11 16:25:36.0 +0200 +++ shadow-4.0.3/debian/passwd.config 2005-05-12 11:27:18.256531891 +0200 @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ while [ $STATE != '9' -a $STATE != ' # priority, so it may not always be seen. If # it isn't, don't compare passwords. COMPARE_PW='' - db_input high passwd/root-password-again \ + db_input critical passwd/root-password-again \ COMPARE_PW=1 || true fi ;; @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ while [ $STATE != '9' -a $STATE != ' db_input critical passwd/username || true db_input critical passwd/user-password || true COMPARE_PW='' - db_input high passwd/user-password-again \ + db_input critical passwd/user-password-again \ COMPARE_PW=1 || true fi ;; signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#304350: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#304350: Here is the patch
this is really easy to fix, and perfectly makes sense. I'd say that we The fact that it makes sense is to be diiscussed. I have already explained zillion of times that the critical priority is meant to minimize questions to the very absolute minimum, so there is a rationale to have the confirmation at high only. This is why I wrote that I'd like to get more advice before doing this change. I already got several in -boot, but this is not onlt a matter for -boot. I wanted to wait a bit before bringing this topic somewhere else, including the Technical Commitee. So, please don't commit the fix now. We have plenty of time to fix that anyway. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#304350: [Pkg-shadow-devel] Bug#304350: Here is the patch
Sure. I didn't plan to commit, just to highlight that it's not a technical difficulty blocking this one but rather a lack of decisions from the entitled ones. As we asked nothing, we indeed cannot blame anyone for that..:-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
