On Fri, May 25, Tomas Mraz wrote:
On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 15:46 +0200, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, Tomas Mraz wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 13:59 +0200, Tomas Mraz wrote:
> > > The attached patch changes the semantics of the default (non enforcing
> > > for root) behavior of pam_pwhistory more reasonable and aligned with the
> > > default behavior of pam_cracklib. It will not enforce error but will
> > > print a message in case the root changes password to a duplicate value
> > > for himself or for another users. The behavior when the option
> > > enforce_for_root is used stays unchanged.
> > >
> > > OK to commit?
> >
> > Any comments?
>
> Since the info for root is only informativ and no error, if
> it is not enforced for root, we shouldn't use pam_error.
> This will only confuse people: getting an error message but
> without the knowledge that the passwort has still be changed.
I'll replace pam_error in the non-enforcing path with pam_info.
Otherwise is it OK?
Yes, else it is fine with me.
--
Thorsten Kukuk, Project Manager/Release Manager SLES
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)