Re: New!!!: Base-passwd 2.0
email@example.com (Philippe Troin) wrote on 20.01.97 in <199701200930.BAA08147@tantale.fifi.org>:
> 1) Integration with shadow passwords:
> Will shadow passwords be used in 1.3 or not ?
> What happens if an entry exists in passwd which is not in shadow ?
> => I assume that the user cannot log in, which is perfect for
If shadow stuff is installed, you could just run the converters to
propagate any changes to the shadow files.
Actually, there are also checking programs for the passwd and group files
that find stuff like duplicate entries. It might be nice to run them
before touching the files, if they are present.
Look at these (in /usr/sbin):
grpck grpconv grpunconv pwck pwconv pwconv5 pwunconv
> 2) Should I offer an alternative to this automatic upgrades, that is
> keep the old conffile scheme for people who prefer it.
> => In this case, that will mean two different packages I think, a
> base-passwd and a base-passwd-auto. I don't like this.
I see no need.
> 3) How to handle transition with the current base-passwd ?
> => I'm thinking about asking the user if I can wipe-out the
> entries between
> 1 and 99 inclusively, and then rebuild it with the new
Dangerous. Also, there are high entries as well.
And, if you change ids, you may have to change file/directory ownership as
well. I just did this by hand, and squid died on me because it could
neither access its logfiles nor its cache.
This is a problem. Maybe the best solution would be to warn the admin and
let him deal with it; finding the stuff that needs to be changed is non-
> Additionnaly, I'd need some beta-testers :-).
> Please volunteer to have your passwd and group kindly changed by an
> automatic program.
Shoot. I think I still have the old version (before my manual upgrade)
lying somewhere, at least for passwd.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com