[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: PAM release status

On Sun, Apr 04, 2004 at 11:36:48PM -0400, David B Harris wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 19:44:26 -0400
> Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
> >     David> On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 16:28:51 -0400 (EDT)
> >     David> Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
> >     >> 1) PAM upgrades from woody force users to answer a dpkg
> >     >> conffile question.
> > 
> >     David> I don't mind. And the solution suggested seems error-prone
> >     David> and difficult for a user to easily understand.
> > 
> > The behavior without the solution is difficult for users to
> > understand.

> You're saying that *conffile* prompts are difficult for an admin to
> understand? Are you sure these folk are using Debian?

It is difficult for a user to understand why they're being asked about
whether they want to keep their locally modified copy of a config file
they never modified.

For some users, it's not difficult, because they know enough to
recognize this as the result of a serious-severity bug; but woody
shipped with that bug, so the damage is done.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: