On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:01:07 +0100, Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx wrote: > What I proposed is to come up with a scheme that actually let the admin > choose, and not require to convince all FE packagers they should change their > packages. I thought that a fedora-usermgmt package that fully replaces > shadow-utils would work. You seem to think it can't work... Without overriding shadow-utils from the outside, you cannot replace it or change its behaviour. Without modifying the dependency chain, you cannot influence installation-order either. Hence there's no way to insert a configuration package into the depchain. Technically, packages which run "useradd" require /usr/sbin/useradd in Fedora space. They don't require an arbitrary "useradd" in $PATH. They don't require a package with the name "shadow-utils". And no other package (not in Core and not in Extras either) must replace or otherwise conflict with /usr/sbin/useradd unless it is given a different file name. Moving the system utility in order to replace it with a modified utility (with different behaviour) opens a can of worms. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
