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

Re: Bug#72738: Unnecessary changes to /etc/passwd



On 00-09-29 Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> Thus spake Christian Kurz on Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 09:34:17AM CDT
> > On 00-09-28 Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > > Package: unknown
> > 
> > Not corrct, should be general. 
> > 
> > > Version: Debian
> > 
> > Argh, this is no version numer, do you mean this serious?

> My original post specified Debian 2.2.  The numerals got stripped somewhere
> along the way.  Sorry if the usage on this field was out of spec.  I wasn't
> sure what to specify since I don't know what package did the deed.

Then you can stil assign it to the package general so that people get
notified and give as version-numer 2.2. 

> > > I upgraded a production slink system last night to Debian 2.2.  At some
> > > point in the install, a process went through /etc/passwd and made at least
> > > one gratuitous change which it should never have made.
> > 
> > > The entry for user majordom, required by the majordomo list server, was
> > > changed from;
> > 
> > > majordom:x:30:31:Majordomo:/var/qmail/majordomo:/bin/sh
> > 
> > > to 
> > 
> > > majordom:x:30:31:Majordomo:/usr/lib/majordomo:/bin/sh
> > 
> > I assume this was done by update-passwd, but for update-passwd to make
> > this change, you either have made the upgrade without watching and the
> > swtich -y to apt-get or you have manually have to enter y for
> > update-passwd to change the passwd. Are you certain, that you manually
> > upgraded? If not and the upgrade once done with apt-get -y, then I have
> > to say, that this is no problem for debian. 

> I updated packages using apt from within dselect, auto-installing everything
> that needed to be updated via transfers from the debian ftp site.  Lots of
> package install scripts asked a lot of questions, as usual, and I kept a
> record on another virtual terminal of those messages which appeared to be

Apperead? How can you say if something appers to be important or not? I
see no one do this automatically. This has always to be done by manual
reading.

> mission-critical to the upgrade.  At no point do I remember being asked if I
> wanted to overwrite any information in /etc/passwd.  I know that the mysql

Look at the code of base-passwd.postinst and see what's done in it. You
will also notice that update-passwd gets only executed if the admin who
does the upgrade says y at the prompt. Otherwise no changes will be
done.

> circulstances should any package, update-passwd or any other, muck with
> passwd file entries which are unrelated to the system or to currently
> installed packages.  Period!  While Debian may advise the use of a certain

When do you understand the update-passwd gets _only_ executed when _you_
as the admin make this decision and either call it from the commandline
or say y in the postinst-script?

> > > Both qmail and majordomo are installed on this system compiled from source
> > > (not from packages), and I don't believe there's even a Debian package for
> > > majordomo at all.
> > 
> > What? When did you look for the last time at the package list? 

> A search through the Debian package list in dselect for "majordomo" and for
> the partial words "major" and "domo" turns up nothing, and I just tried it

Hm, then the packages has not only been removed in woody, but also
potato. If you upgraded, you had slink and slink contained a
majordomo-package, which you will find in the package list of slink, if
they didn't remove it there also.

> > > My majordomo lists (one of which is commercial) have been down all day until
> > > one astute list subscriber wrote me personally with the details of the
> > > bounce message she received and I was able to spot the problem.
> > 
> > What? You administrate a mailing-list and need one day to find out that
> > the setup is broken? I'm happy that I'm not subscribed to any of the
> > list you administrate, because I expect a mailing list admin to notice
> > any error after some (normally 3-4 hours).

> This is none of your business, nor of anyone else at Debian, and your
> comment is inappropriate.

But then don't tell us that the update went smooth and you check
everything (including the mailserver as you wrote on debian-qa) and saw
no problems. How can you say that you saw no problems after the upgrade,
when a user notices after a day that the mailserver is broken? Please
get your facts right, before you blame debian for things that debian is
not responsible for.

Ciao
     Christian
-- 
          Debian Developer and Quality Assurance Team Member
    1024/26CC7853 31E6 A8CA 68FC 284F 7D16  63EC A9E6 67FF 26CC 7853

Attachment: pgpFGDoxMrffC.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: