James Sleeman
2005-Sep-30 01:18 UTC
Bug#330743: cups-pdf: No longer installable when not using shadow passwords.
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 14:37 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:> But why does your system not have a shadow password file?Because there is no law saying I have to have to use shadow passwords and I prefer not to on this particular system.
Steve Langasek
2005-Sep-30 03:18 UTC
[Adduser-devel] Bug#330743: cups-pdf: No longer installable when not using shadow passwords.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 12:28:05PM +1200, James Sleeman wrote:> On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 14:37 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > But why does your system not have a shadow password file?> Because there is no law saying I have to have to use shadow passwords > and I prefer not to on this particular system.Well, there''s no law that says Debian has to support non-shadow systems, either. If you were making a case that you don''t need /etc/shadow because all your account data is in Kerberos or LDAP or something of the sort, or that the /etc/shadow file was missing from your system because of a bug, that would be one thing; but I don''t see any reason why Debian should be expected to support passwd-only systems. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/adduser-devel/attachments/20050929/60c4574f/attachment.pgp
James Sleeman
2005-Sep-30 03:18 UTC
[Adduser-devel] Bug#330743: cups-pdf: No longer installable when not using shadow passwords.
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:51 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:> auto-converting to shadow rather than supporting the > limited semantics of shadowless systems.Sounds fair enough, provided the update isn''t just silently done, it should definatly warn the user that they are going to be switched to shadow passwords, or they can stop then with the understanding that some stuff won''t work.
Steve Langasek
2005-Sep-30 03:18 UTC
[Adduser-devel] Bug#330743: cups-pdf: No longer installable when not using shadow passwords.
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 02:35:07PM +1200, James Sleeman wrote:> On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:29 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:> > that would be one thing; but I don''t see any reason why Debian should be > > expected to support passwd-only systems.> When I installed this debian system, many years ago it must be said, I > was given the OPTION of using shadow passwords if I wished to do so, at > the time (and mostly presently) I wished not to do so, for my own > reasons. If Debian still gives that as an OPTION then packages > shouldn''t really expect that OPTION being chosen, unless there is a way > that packages can specify a dependancy on shadow passwords so that they > won''t even attempt to install without them, then I think that Debian > packages must not simply break when people do not pick the OPTION in the > install process.> Of course, as I say, it''s been a long time since I''ve done a debian > install, so maybe shadow is no longer optional but a requirement. In > that case, fine.Yes, it''s no longer an option. We should of course still support an upgrade path for systems whose admins opted not to use shadow passwords, but I think we should do that by auto-converting to shadow rather than supporting the limited semantics of shadowless systems. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/adduser-devel/attachments/20050929/8bc2d9b4/attachment.pgp
James Sleeman
2005-Sep-30 03:18 UTC
[Adduser-devel] Bug#330743: cups-pdf: No longer installable when not using shadow passwords.
On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 19:29 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:> that would be one thing; but I don''t see any reason why Debian should be > expected to support passwd-only systems.When I installed this debian system, many years ago it must be said, I was given the OPTION of using shadow passwords if I wished to do so, at the time (and mostly presently) I wished not to do so, for my own reasons. If Debian still gives that as an OPTION then packages shouldn''t really expect that OPTION being chosen, unless there is a way that packages can specify a dependancy on shadow passwords so that they won''t even attempt to install without them, then I think that Debian packages must not simply break when people do not pick the OPTION in the install process. Of course, as I say, it''s been a long time since I''ve done a debian install, so maybe shadow is no longer optional but a requirement. In that case, fine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/adduser-devel/attachments/20050930/2958d1a4/attachment.html