On 2025-02-16 23:03, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
The problems were already all solved with the first coreutils versions
having systemd-logind support. Even with all the bug reports I don't
see a need for changes in Coreutils, only in distributions not
enabling systemd-logind support in all packages.
Hi,
Let me clarify some things.
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 11:52 PM Paul Eggert wrote:
>
> At this point I confess I don't know what changes would be needed for
> GNU 'who'. I see a difference of opinion as to whether 'w' works. There
> seem to be multiple mechanisms in play (utmp, wtmp, wtmpdb, la
* Paul Eggert [250216 23:52]:
> At this point I confess I don't know what changes would be needed for GNU
> 'who'. I see a difference of opinion as to whether 'w' works. There seem to
> be multiple mechanisms in play (utmp, wtmp, wtmpdb, lastlog2, logind, maybe
> others?) and I don't know when to
* Michael Stone [250216 22:45]:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 07:05:13PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > No, w(1) is broken (at least in sid). See the difference between
> > "who" and "w" with systemd 256.7-1, i.e. before the upgrade of
> > systemd that removed utmp support:
>
> That's because some
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 07:29:22PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> After some search, quoting you from
>
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2024/04/msg00493.html
>
> | Subject: Y2038-safe replacements for utmp/wtmp and lastlog
> | From: Chris Hofstaedtler
> | Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:12
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 12:28:03AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
No data for xterm. Other terminals are affected too, such as
GNOME Terminal.
Yes, much of the data from the old utmp is simply not there. A sane
transition would deprecate utmp in one release while adding a
replacement, then rem
On 2025-02-16 23:56:43 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> * Michael Stone [250216 22:45]:
> > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 07:05:13PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > No, w(1) is broken (at least in sid). See the difference between
> > > "who" and "w" with systemd 256.7-1, i.e. before the upgrade of
At this point I confess I don't know what changes would be needed for
GNU 'who'. I see a difference of opinion as to whether 'w' works. There
seem to be multiple mechanisms in play (utmp, wtmp, wtmpdb, lastlog2,
logind, maybe others?) and I don't know when to use which, or even how
to use them
On 2025-02-16 03:02, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
The introduction of the unique operator (-u) returns a wrong answer when used
with the human sorting operator (-h).
The answer is "wrong" only in the sense that sort's documented and
implemented behavior is not what you expect.
To fix this mismat
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 07:05:13PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
No, w(1) is broken (at least in sid). See the difference between
"who" and "w" with systemd 256.7-1, i.e. before the upgrade of
systemd that removed utmp support:
That's because someone decided to suddenly remove an interface whic
On 2025-02-16 19:05:13 +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2025-02-16 18:55:54 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" needs to ask seat manager
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:24:11PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" shou
Package: coreutils
It was reported to Debian that who does not correctly report logged
in sessions on systems not using /run/utmp, see https://bugs.debian.org/1079575
It is claimed w(1) operates correctly, probably by using libsystemd.
Please implement the same logic in who.
Thanks,
Chris
It was reported to Debian that who does not correctly report logged
in sessions on systems not using /run/utmp, see https://bugs.debian.org/1079575
It is claimed w(1) operates correctly, probably by using libsystemd.
Please implement the same logic in who.
Thanks,
Chris
Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" needs to ask seat manager
On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:24:11PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" should support wtmpdb (y2038)
This is mistaken. wtmpdb is a history database. who(1) wants current
sessions, and they are being tr
On 2025-02-16 18:55:54 +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" needs to ask seat manager
>
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 05:24:11PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > Control: retitle -1 coreutils: "who" should support wtmpdb (y2038)
>
> This is mistaken. wtmpdb is a hi
On Sun, 16 Feb 2025, at 06:23, Paul Eggert wrote:
> I don't see a bug there, just an infelicity. -h means 'sort' should look
> for a number, and your data lines don't start with numbers.
>
> Try 'sort --debug -h -u' to see more.
The --debug output here isn't as helpful as it could be; taking a si
My concern is best described as follows.
~ $ echo -e
"CVE-2018-13787\nCVE-2019-16649\nCVE-2019-16650\nCVE-2020-15046\nCVE-2018-13787"
| sort -h
CVE-2018-13787
CVE-2018-13787
CVE-2019-16649
CVE-2019-16650
CVE-2020-15046
~ $ echo -e
"CVE-2018-13787\nCVE-2019-16649\nCVE-2019-16650\nCVE-2020-15046
Indeed there is also "The twenty-second of July" format.
But for Chinese it's like the user can get
Seventh month,
but not seventh day,
all due to there being %A and %B, only down to the n
Anyway isn't it odd that there are only
locale’s abbreviated weekday name (e.g., ‘Sun’)
locale’s f
On 2025-02-16 00:09, Dan Jacobson wrote:
PE> Sorry, I don't understand the bug report. Are you asking for a new
PE> feature, or are you saying that currently GNU 'date' outputs incorrect
PE> strings for %A and/or %B? If the former, what new feature exactly? And
Yes the former.
OK, marking this
All I know is in Chinese the months and days are like
一月一日 (1/1)
二月二日 (2/2)
and date(1) will allow me to print
一月 but not 一日
二月 but not 二日
probably because date allows two versions for months
1 or January
2 or February
but not days, because in English none is needed.
But that's not the case for Chi
20 matches
Mail list logo
