auth-type local trouble in 2.0.1

[Oleg Kozheltsev]

Hello,

After update from 1.1.7 to 2.0.1 on FreeBSD 6.3 (from ports), 'users' 
file seems not fully read...

TEST            User-Password == "TEST", Auth-Type := Local
                 Exec-Program-Wait = "/home/corp/aaa/auth_test"

1.1.7 debug:

   Processing the authorize section of radiusd.conf
modcall: entering group authorize for request 1
   modcall[authorize]: module "preprocess" returns ok for request 1
radius_xlat:  '/var/corp/radacct/1.1.1.1/2008/03/auth-detail-20080321'
rlm_detail: 
/var/corp/radacct/%{Client-IP-Address}/%Y/%m/auth-detail-%Y%m%d expands 
to /var/corp/radacct/1.1.1.1/2008/03/auth-detail-20080321
   modcall[authorize]: module "auth_log" returns ok for request 1
     users: Matched entry TEST at line 218
   modcall[authorize]: module "files" returns ok for request 1
modcall: leaving group authorize (returns ok) for request 1
   rad_check_password:  Found Auth-Type Local
auth: type Local
auth: user supplied User-Password matches local User-Password

2.0.1 debug:

+- entering group authorize
++[preprocess] returns ok
         expand: 
/var/corp/radacct/%{Client-IP-Address}/%Y/%m/auth-detail-%Y%m%d -> 
/var/corp/radacct/1.1.1.1/2008/03/auth-detail-20080321
rlm_detail: 
/var/corp/radacct/%{Client-IP-Address}/%Y/%m/auth-detail-%Y%m%d expands 
to /var/corp/radacct/1.1.1.1/2008/03/auth-detail-20080321
         expand: %t -> Fri Mar 21 17:45:57 2008
++[auth_log] returns ok
WARNING: Found User-Password == "...".
WARNING: Are you sure you don't mean Cleartext-Password?
WARNING: See "man rlm_pap" for more information.
     users: Matched entry TEST at line 218
++[files] returns ok
   rad_check_password:  Found Auth-Type Local
auth: type Local
auth: No password configured for the user
Login incorrect (No password configured for the user): [TEST/TEST] (from 
client c3640 port 0 cli 77777777)
auth: Failed to validate the user.
Login incorrect: [TEST/TEST] (from client c3640 port 0 cli 7777777)

Sample config files readed, web and list archive searched - no one have 
same problem. In 2.x configs something must be added? No one use this? 
Can someone:

"...You should first discuss it on the users list, to see if anyone can 
reproduce it..."

please :) or this is bug, and he must be reported?... Thanks