Problem with default user creation
Hi,
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:07:37PM +1000, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> On 5/11/06, Frederic Lehobey <Frederic.Lehobey@free.fr> wrote:
> >On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 05:35:30PM +1000, Andrew Donnellan wrote:
> >> On 5/10/06, Frederic Lehobey <Frederic.Lehobey@free.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> >The error message I get is:
> >> >`User not known to the underlying authentication module'
> >> >
> >> >When looking at the init sequence, I can catch the following lines:
> >> >
> >> >Begin: Adding live CD user ...
> >> >bash: line 2: pwck: command not found
> >> >Please correct the error and rerun `/sbin/shadowconfig on'
> >>
> >> Hasn't happened to me.
> >
> >Thanks for the hint. It happens only when I am using my local Debian
> >mirror that used to work flawlessly so far (and for other sid hosts).
> >I hope it is not the signal for much bigger trouble. :-( I am
> >currently checking this mirror.
>
> By local do you mean e.g. mirror in your nation/mirror provided by
> ISP/etc. or do you mean a mirror you set up for your local network?
I meant the mirror I set up for my local network. It is mirrored from
ftp.fr.debian.org. But it seems to be the right question! (Thanks
again for the insightful hints.)
I have now performed the following tests:
The problem exists when using:
* my local mirror (personal network) that seems to be accurately in
sync with ftp.fr.debian.org
* directly ftp.fr.debian.org (hence the problem comes from there)
* directly ftp2.fr.debian.org (a different provider)
The problem vanishes when using:
* directly ftp.debian.org
I will stop there the tests for today (building from outside mirrors
takes too much time). So either it is a temporary discrepancy between
the master and its mirrors that may vanish with the next mirror pulse
(I will check tomorrow) or it is something else in the way primary
mirrors are made. I have not identified the faulty package though (if
there is...). :-( (No update to shadow).
Am I really the only one seeing this on mirrors other than
ftp.debian.org?
Best regards,
Fr?d?ric Lehobey
Reply to: