On Wed, 03 Nov 2010 20:40:15 +0100, Lukas Baxa wrote: > Camaleón wrote: >> On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:35:20 +0000, Wolodja Wentland wrote: >> (...) >> >>> … which is clearly not working in the way it is described. I have not >>> reproduced this bug myself, but it is exactly that and should >>> therefore be reported - not by posting to d-d - but rather by >>> executing "reportbug passwd". >> >> I've tried in a lenny box and faced the same behaviour than the OP. >> Maybe the new policy is to be applied _a day after_ the change or it >> should be enforced _as soon as_ changed? Is a "passwd" error (not >> reading/applying "/etc/shadow" mandate) or a "chage" one? :-? >> >> >> > Even if the discussion to this topic shows that the mindays option of > chage might not be very useful in most cases, it doesn't work as it > should.
I agree. > I would like to file a new bug report, but I'm not sure against which > package. I'm considering either passwd or libpam-modules. (...) "passwd" (as Wolodja suggested) should not allow the user to change his password if "/etc/shadow" states so. Anyway, I would not worry about the "correctness" of the package against you are to report the bug as devels will change it if they estimate it convenient. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2010.11.04.10.55...@gmail.com
