RFC behavior when shadow passwd file is missing with [PATCH]

[Tito]

On Saturday 24 March 2007 01:37:48 Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> Hi Tito,
> 
> On Friday 23 March 2007 22:31, Tito wrote:
> > I noticed that in busybox we adopt different behavior when the shadow passwd file is missing:
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> > so 7 applets just emit a warning and use /etc/passwd instead, while 2 applets
> > (adduser and sulogin)  error out and die.
> 
> I think that shadow-capable bbox should use /etc/passwd if /etc/shadow
> record is not found.
> 
> Rationale: having shadow-enabled bbox should not *force* admin to use
> shadow passwords, it should *give him an option* to use them.
> 
> > but probably adduser could adopt the same strategy as addgroup:
> > 
> > file = fopen_or_warn(bb_path_gshadow_file, "a");
> 
> I think this is the right approach.
> --
> vda
> 

Hi, so here is a patch for adduser with some minor clean ups.
Apply if you like it.

Ciao,
Tito

BTW:  while compiling current svn (make defconfig, make) i got this warning,
          but I was not able to figure out a way to fix it.

findutils/find.c: In function ‘parse_params’:
findutils/find.c:348: warning: no previous prototype for ‘alloc_action’



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: adduser_shadow.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1160 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/attachments/20070324/b58e9972/attachment-0002.bin