Hi!
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:55:58PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:37:40PM +0100, Nicolas François wrote:
> > We probably also need to remove the passwd dependency on login (loginpam
> > substvar).
> The Hurd package provides login, so the dependency gets resolved
> (b
Hi!
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:04:00AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> > WRT to the patch you sent -- alternative way to achieve
> > the same effect would be to make "login" package
> > non-re
Hi!
On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:25:13PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:47:03PM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:04:00AM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 12:01:41AM +0200, Alexander Gattin wrote:
Package: i2c-source
Version: 1:2.9.2-1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Hi!
i2c-source fails to install/pack modules package
for 2.4.32 because it tries to find smth. under
/lib/modules/2.6.10-debp4/build (or source?) which
is host kernel, not target...
-
make[3]: Leaving directo
Hi!
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:29:43PM +0100, Helge Kreutzmann wrote:
> I replaced one terminal of mine with:
> 9:23:respawn:/sbin/mingetty tty9
>
> and it at least fixes this bug.
yes, mingetty is:
1) for virtual consoles only (i.e. no serial lines
support and thus no bitness-autodetection)
Hi!
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 06:45:01PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Alexander, have you made any progress in trying to reproduce this bug
> report?
>
> This is "su segfaults using encrypted LDAP" which needs some LDAP
> setup to be worked on...
nope, not yet.
The only additional informatio
Hi!
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I absolutely don't know whether someone is still investigating it. I
> even don't know if it happens with recent releases of shadow.
I suspect it does. Sometimes. Actually I think the bug
is caused by /var/tmp/utmp file bein
Package: pump
Version: 0.8.24-1
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hi!
I needed to register hostnames in different DNS zones
depending on domain requested by DHCP clients. DHCP
server daemon is dhcp3.
Using "interim" ddns-update style of dhcp3-server the
problem can't be solved with pump as client (
Hi!
On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 09:46:13AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> So, Alex, please go and commit this fix. Don't forget commenting the
> quilt patch so that we later remember whether it's worth being
> submitted upstream (it probably is anywayas it improves logging)
I think it's not wo
Forgot to say that I have committed the patch. Probably
I'll improve it further, but it's quite usable right
now.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
> I made preliminary patch which adds support for all 5
> modes (5th is made default) through cmdline options and
> configfile directives.
so far, after minimal tesing, I can confirm that my hosts
ultimately started to register in desired zone.
> Currently patch deals only with sending FQDN/
> so far, after minimal tesing, I can confirm that my hosts
> ultimately started to register in desired zone.
This claim was wrong. What actually happened is that DHCP request
is recognized as FQDN by dhcp3-server.
WinXP clients send similar requests, although they send both
HN and FQDN options (
Package: dhcp3-server
Version: 3.0.3-5
Severity: wishlist
Hello!
For more than a week I'm fighting with DHCP-DNS update
in our local network. We have Windows machines, *Linux
and *BSD ones. On *Linux I mostly have pump as DHCP
client (for reasons not to be disclosed here I prefer
pump, udhcpc and
Hi!
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 04:40:53AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Sorry, what problem are you trying to solve?
>
> > Excuse me for the confusion. I talk here about another
> > issue, similar to what we have in bug #333138.
>
> > Now I tend to agree with Robert that this is a bug,
> > bec
Hi!
> and "wise" advice on that issue. I personnally tend to favor the
> current choice of only one prompt, but this is definitely not a strong
> position.
IMHO, the wisest thing would be to use some default
like "root" for root's password when configuring at
"critical" level and ask twice at low
Hi!
On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 08:49:53PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> As mentioned elsewhere in the thread, I also think that the only other
> option that would not be unreasonable to defend would be not asking
> for a password at all in critical mode. Which is not the current
> discussion,
Hi!
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 01:18:13AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Since any login session these days will invoke a shell,
Not true.
> there is no point in having login.defs set the umask
> -- the shell will override it anyway.
Not true again: tcsh, zsh
> Thus, so that people do not have t
Hi!
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 08:09:07AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0751 +0200]:
> > This comes from a discussion in debian-devel. In that discussion, the
> > existence of the pam_umask module was also mentioned.
>
> Even without pa
Hi!
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 06:24:55PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> operation of these scripts by calling /usr/local/sbin/$0.local if it
> exists. I use this to keep auth information in sync between two
> machines. I need this feature for passwd as well. I don't want to
> use NIS. :)"
>
>
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 07:06:24PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> In #269573, the bug submitter complains that he cannot remove the bash
> package, because its prerm
No, _postrm_ script calls remove-shell (just looked
into it at the moment).
> script calls.remove-shell, which is a she
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 07:12:33PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> The default UMASK value 022 is insecure for default Debian installation.
> I suggest using more strict 027 in /etc/login.defs
For what? The default is there for years. W
severity 304934 normal
tags 304934 confirmed
retitle 304934 [ALEXANDER] passwd: -e option should override PASS_MAX_DAYS
(from /etc/login.defs)
thanks
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 06:54:04PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> when PASS_MAX_DAYS is set in login.defs, useradd creates accounts that
> expires
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 07:12:54PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> No. I don't know where the -x came from in my mind. But, alas, it
> looks like useradd doesn't allow the PASS_MAX_DAYS to be overridden on
> the command line, making this bug unfixable within adduser.
OK. We will elaborate on this
retitle 304934 [ALEXANDER] passwd: there should be a way to override
PASS_MAX_DAYS in useradd
severity wishlist
thanks
oops!
That's all about password expiration, not _account_
expiration.
> > when PASS_MAX_DAYS is set in login.defs, useradd creates accounts that
> > expires. This causes adduser
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 10:26:43PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 09:46:52PM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> > I think "-e" option should just have higher priority
> > than PASS_MAX_DAYS.
>
> -e seems to set a different field in /e
Tags: patch
Hi!
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 11:41:35AM +0200, Nicolas FranÃois wrote:
> Can you try commenting the PATCHLIST line in debian/rules.
You found a workaround! :)
> This may be a dpatch bug. PATCHLIST is reversed to create UNPATCHLIST in
> /usr/share/dpatch/dpatch.make, but dpatch also r
reassign 269573 bash
thanks
I checked the issue for chrooted woody and sarge.
This bug is really for bash package and we should't do
anything about it.
Thus reassigning.
P.S. Marc Wilson: catch this! ;)
--
WBR,
xrgtn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
bash should either:
a) not have postrm script (move as much as possible to
prerm)
b) recode it in C
c) use alternatives for sh
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I think that we can make remove-shell/add-shell scripts to
have #!/bin/sh -e header instead of current #!/bin/bash -e
I ran checkbashisms and checked the scripts with ash -e,
zsh -e and ksh -e (the one from pdksh, WRT ksh93 the
scripts have problems, though).
I may also check it with other
Hi!
> > P.S. This fix is intended for systems without bash and is
> > related to bug #269573.
> > It's also related to the decision we are planning to make,
> > i.e. moving remove-shell/add-shell out of shadow or not.
> So, the fix is not intended to fix 208514, right ?
Well, no.
Original post
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 06:30:28PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> However, if for some (good or bad) reason, the suer groups has other
> members than the currently deleted user, I agree with the bug
> submitter : userdel should at least issue a warningor maybe even
> *not* delete the gr
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 05:53:29PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > if you can setup LDAP authentication with TLS encryption then you should
> > be able to reproduce it.
> I'm not sure that we have, in the team, someone able to build such
> setup.
I'll try to set LDAP auth at lab. Anyway
Package: bash
Version: 2.05b-26
Severity: normal
Tags: sarge sid
Hi!
What I really wanted is reopening bug #265982 (titled
"Please do not depend on passwd at all, bad in chroot
etc.")
The problem is claimed to be dealed with, but it seems
to be mistreated a bit:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-cache s
Hi!
Quoting Karl Ramm:
> AFAIC, the *most* right fix is to do nothing (other than
> to remove the dependency in bash).
I disagree. add-shell/remove-shell are very good
candidates for Debian-specific maintenance stuff.
BTW, dependency in bash _is still not removed_
(see bug #305232).
> Also, for
tags 295416 confirmed
thanks
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 06:30:28PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> However, if for some (good or bad) reason, the suer groups has other
> members than the currently deleted user, I agree with the bug
> submitter : userdel should at least issue a warningor ma
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 22, 2005 at 08:33:35AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > > Please explain me how, on a non compromised system, users can replace
> > > the login program with something else.
> > I'm speaking of a simple childish script kiddy script that you start
> > as a normal local user *witho
Hello, Christian!
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 10:45:41PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> David,
>
> Thanks for the patch you provided in #256732 about bashisms and best
> grep use in shadow's maintainer scripts.
>
> We will apply this patch in later development of the package as I
> haven't seen a
retitle 256732 [POST-SARGE] [ALEXANDER] XSI:isms in debian-scripts
thanks
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 07:04:31AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > BTW, the patch already contains the changes I proposed
> > to remove-shell/add-shell scripts (namely the
> > "#!/bin/bash -e" --> "#!/bin/sh -e" mov
retitle 264879 [POST-SARGE] [ALEXANDER] useradd: colon allowed at start of
user/groupname
thanks
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 08:01:23AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Alexander Gattin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > So, probably, I'll just commit them in correct order
&
retitle 264879 [POST-SARGE] [ALEXANDER] useradd: colon allowed in
user/groupnames
thanks
Hi!
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 12:40:34AM +0200, Nicolas FranÃois wrote:
> It's even worse: good_name does not return 0 on error. So no checking
> is performed.
Oops! I checked it and good_name really always
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 08:14:14PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 07:15:51AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Marc, CC'ing you : what is your opinion about the "right" behaviour
> > from userdel (from deluser point of view) when a user group has an
> > extra member and n
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 08:14:22AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> All seems perfect to me.
Nevertheless, I found smaller problem with 406th patch
while Nicolas found more serious one month ago
(good_name() always returned 1). And I missed it this
time. ;)
2myself: should be more attentive
Hi!
On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 08:10:01AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Probably we should consider the following functional
> > split between adduser/deluser (i.e. high-level) and
> > useradd/userdel (low-level) tools:
> The most important split, imho, is that useradd/userdel and other
> low-l
Package: fetchmail
Version: 6.2.5-12
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hello!
I have POP3 account shared between M$OE and fetchmail.
While the former has an option for e.g. removing
messages which are older than specified maximum age
from server, the latter (i.e. fetchmail) lacks any
comparable capa
Hi!
I forgot to add that I _have read_ the FAQ, namely the
G5 question/answer ;):
> G5. I want to make fetchmail behave like Outlook Express.
>
>The second-most-requested feature for fetchmail, after content-based
>filtering, is the ability to have it remove messages from a maildrop
Hi!
IMHO, this is by design (citing
driver.c/fetch_messages()):
> if ((msgcode == MSGLEN_TOOLARGE) && !check_only)
> {
> mark_oversized(ctl, num, msgsize);
> suppress_delete = TRUE;
> }
The suppress_delete prevents message from being
flushe
Hi!
I just forgot about a "secret" -O option in
useradd. :)
You can use it to override whatever values from
login.defs
For example, regarding bug #298883, use of:
> `useradd -O PASS_MAX_DAYS=9 usr298883`
will solve your problem (other solution, that you have
currently implemented, involves `c
Hi, Marc!
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 07:20:29AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 02:30:08AM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> > I just forgot about a "secret" -O option in
> > useradd. :)
> > You can use it to override whatever values from
>
tags 264879 pending
thanks
> OK. My proposal remains the same: I'll just fix the
> "relaxed good_name" patch and probably also disable
> usage of '\n' char in user/groupnames.
I have done it.
Now user/group names are considered acceptable only if
they match ^[^-:\n][^:\n]*$
This is done to pres
Hi!
On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 08:42:40PM +0200, Martin Quinson wrote:
> > Ha, on my system if you can do Alt-SysRq-K, you can do
> > Alt-SysRq-U, Alt-SysRq-B, Alt-SysRq-O and so on.
> >
> > I didn't try to restrict this and don't know whether
> > there's a way to do it.
Appears that there are two
tags 293492 confirmed
retitle 293492 [ALEXANDER] useradd: by default creates user with unspecified
shell, this causes problems
thanks
Hi!
First of all, it seems that the bug #48304 is back.
I think this happened with switch to 4.x.x series of
shadow.
The reason is empty initial value for def_sh
reassign 268656 passwd, debianutils
severity 268656 wishlist
merge 293171 268656
thanks
I'm lowering severity of 268656 because the joined
bug is not about bad dependencies anymore. Those
are bash's problems (bug #305232).
Thus wishlist.
And here (293171 268656 208514) we are deciding about
whet
Hi!
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 08:39:08PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Alexander Gattin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.18.0037 +0200]:
Ypu can omit my e-mail when replying to this list ;)
> > Why so? I see different behaviour (/dev/pts/3).
> > Maybe you mean t
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 10:37:25PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Alexander Gattin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.18.2229 +0200]:
> > Then, I run login:
> ... as I said in the bug report: it works *only* through login...
Thus, here:
> [new login, after changing
Hi!
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 12:52:12AM +0200, Nicolas François wrote:
> I can also reproduce it.
Me too, except for "no characters echoed" symptom.
> It is caused by the new setting of CLOSE_SESSIONS
> to yes in /etc/login.defs.
Excellent analysis.
I came to conclusion that suspend returns cont
Hi!
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 10:15:14AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Yes, but while login.defs can't catch all entries of a
> > user to system (like through cron/at/ssh etc.) which
> > shellrc can catch, it _can_ still catch entries of user
> > with a non-shell (pppd) or with a shell which d
Hi!
On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 08:33:48AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.20.0803 +0200]:
> > > Summary: I would better wait _till_ pam_umask finds its way into
> > > default Debian /etc/pam.d/common-session, and comment UMASK out
> > > _afte
tags 314727 upstream pending
thanks
Hi!
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 07:40:27PM +0200, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote:
> Probaly on CLOSE_SESSIONS=yes is something missing in current code.
> Question is "what is missing ?".
Sorry, I checked upstream only 0.5 hour ago. The bug
is fixed there in run_shell funct
severity 315767 minor
reassign 315767 shadow
merge 315767 256732
thanks
Hi!
On Sat, Jun 25, 2005 at 09:59:38PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> scripts /usr/sbin/add-shell and /usr/sbin/remove-shell are both starting as
> #!/bin/bash
> I've looked at both of them and they don't seem to requ
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 09:30:08AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > Is there any situation where shadow is a bad thing? I mean, does someone
> > somewhere on the earth really need this feature?
> The template mentions that shadow passwords can be nasty in NIS
> environments.
Yes, but only
Package: smbfs
Version: 3.0.14a-3
Severity: important
Hi!
I tried to do homedir automounting through CIFS
protocol. It's pretty obvious SMB isn't approproiate
for this task, although first I tried libpam-mount/SMB
and it worked. CIFS didn't. For the same account, of
course.
As it turned out the
Hi!
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:07:12 +0200
Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Quoting Marc Haber ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
/var/lib/dpkg/tmp.ci/preinst: line 33: shadowconfig: command not found
...
The point of this fix was activating shadow passwords on
*new*
installs and, because of the a
tags 319138 pending
thanks
Not run shadowconfig in preinst but in postinst?
Done that. Please note that shadowconfig will be turned on
by default on _first_ installation only (or when
reinstalling
after purge).
--
WBR,
xrgtn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 02:56:44PM +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 17:33 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > Here you can plain see that password used by mount.cifs
> > > simply _doesn't_ _match_.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that this bug is as simple as you suggest it i
Hi!
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 08:00:09AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> the config script fails with exit code 1 (but without error message)
> if shadowconfig fails, for example when a syntax error is found in the
> group file.
But, err..., when there's a syntax error in
/etc/group or /etc/passwd file,
tags 319136 pending
thanks
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 07:48:08AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > > the config script fails with exit code 1 (but without error message)
OK, your main concern, seems to be the ^,
right?
Then I think I've found a reason -- the shadowco
Hi!
On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 07:15:25PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 07:55:13PM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> > BTW I would prefer to have a sequence of actions to
> > reproduce the bug. ;)
>
> Create a syntactically invalid /etc/group, for exampl
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 07:48:08AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > if ! shadowconfig bla; then
> > echo >&2 "ERR: shadowconfig failed"
> > exit 1
> > fi
> >
> > Having the -e trip is something to be avoided.
>
> In order for the above code to work, you mean?
Oops, now I see -- you mean "-e tri
Hi!
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 09:00:01PM +0200, Nicolas FranÃois wrote:
> What also worry me is that Ottavio wrote that it was working when he
> used useradd, and Pawel bug title is "useradd -m do not copy /etc/skel/*
> subdirectories".
Citing Ottavio:
> During the installation the program ask if yo
Hi, Nicolas!
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 01:24:04AM +0200, Nicolas FranÃois wrote:
> > If the user has the expiry field[0] set to 0 in /etc/shadow, the passwd
> > command treats it as an expired account[1] whereas chage[2] displays
> > that it will never expire. Removing the 0 to make the field empty
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 01:26:13AM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> Citing Ottavio:
> > During the installation the program ask if you want
> > to create a normal account. When it creates the new
> > account it doesn't create the .bashrc and the
> > .bash_profile
Hello!
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 11:56:05PM +0200, Nicolas FranÃois wrote:
> So I now think the best way is to fix chage so that it does not display
> Account Expires:Never
> but
> Account Expires:Jan 01, 1970
Yes, this relly annoys. Saw it today again...
> (Other changes not relat
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 03:21:05AM +0200, Tomasz KÅoczko wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Nicolas [iso-8859-1] FranÃois wrote:
> [..]
> > * the implementation from RedHat, which seems reasonable to me. (maybe
> > we should not allow usernames starting with a '-').
Consider what most tools (fro
Hi!
retitle 302630 `useradd -d` behaviour could be clarified in manpage
severity 302630 wishlist
tags 302630 +patch
stop
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 07:45:33PM -0500, Jiann-Ming Su wrote:
> > useradd does not create home directories or groups. I have found this
> > to be the case on i386, alpha, a
owner 304934 Alexander Gattin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
retitle 304934 [XRGTN] Please document the -O option of useradd
thanks
Hi!
I think 316089 and 317012 is there because of closing
298883 by chosing chage as an instrument to override
password expiration... :-/
I propose to use `user
owner 317012 Alexander Gattin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
thanks
Hi!
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 06:55:53AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Marc Haber explained on IRC that the "-O" option adds a problem to
> backport (on the other hand, this -O option actually exists since a
> lo
owner 317012 Nicolas François <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
tags 317012 pending
thanks
Nicolas was faster than me. :)
>From what I see in diff, this is going to be proposed
upstream...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Nicolas François wrote:
> a patch was included in the 4.0.3-36 release, but this one breaks some
> scripts (see #317264).
Yes, but really those scripts are buggy, not new su.
> Thus, I'm considering to revert this patch and fix your bug by documentin
reopen 249372
tags 249372 moreinfo
thanks
Hi!
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 11:18:21PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> Hey people,
>
> this patch got applied a while ago, which makes /bin/login being
> provided by the login package and passwd Depend on it.
Why is this a problem? shadow's passwd depende
tags 249372 pending
thanks
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 11:18:21PM +0200, Michael Banck wrote:
> > this patch got applied a while ago, which makes /bin/login being
> > provided by the login package and passwd Depend on it.
Now hurd's "passwd" will have non-versioned
dependency on "login" that should
tags 317747 confirmed
thanks
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 02:08:26 -0700 (PDT) dean gaudet
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
this bug has been introduced since 1:4.0.3-35 ...
perhaps related to the
fix for #314727.
This claim needs to be verified.
with zsh as your shell, this sequence is busted:
I see a
Hi!
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
at first i tried just adding the setpgrp...
You mean if(setpgrp()) exit(1);?
but with that the su'd zsh doesn't ever seem to wake up.
so i threw in the TIOCSPGRP calls to pass the tty pgrp
to the su'd zsh..
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
dean gaudet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
both pids 4788 and 4789 have pgrp 4788. when zsh
suspends itself it sends SIGTSTP to -4788. this TSTP hits
both zsh(4789) and su(4788) -- which causes zsh(4782)
to finish its waitpid (it was waiting on su(4788)).
tags 317747 pending
thanks
As I already said, I'd just prefer to block/ignore
several signals like TSTP.
I did the same as in src/newgrp.c in our current shadow.
I don't currently want to use sigprocmask() in su.
Most probably I'll do the same as in upstream
Hopefully we will release an ex
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 07:44:29PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Please read http://bugs.debian.org/155279 for the whole story.
And also bug #287108, although they are _different_.
But related very closely.
> In short, this bug requests that "auth required pam_env.so" is added
> to /etc/
Hi!
On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 09:14:58AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I'm ready to follow the bug submitter's advice, with Bastian K. advice
> as well but I'm indeed not very competent about this.
If Debian used pam_xauth, for example, the setting
would already have been changed to be "yes" by
Hi!
> In fact, having CLOSE_SESSION set to "no" results in
> pam_close_session not being called,
ALSO: this results in pam_end _not being called_ too!
The latter will cause "PAM data cleanup callbacks" (PDCC)
being _not run_ (for description of PDCC see pam_set_data
in /usr/share/doc/libpam-doc/
tags 168065 unreproducible
thanks
Hi!
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 07:08:29PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> "passwd -e" can only be issued by root.
>
> So either the expired user is logged in...and (s)he will continue
> his/her session until (s)he logs out...and will then be prevented to
> log in
Hi!
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 08:05:44PM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> I've just read the bug log for #208514 and I must admit that, even if
> I understand the topic in general (Herbert did not want to make his
> shell package depend on passwd if it needs add-shell to add it to
> /etc/shells), I
merge 208514 268656
retitle 208514 [TO CLOSE 20050413] add/remove-shell should be moved from passwd
to base-files or debianutils?
thanks
Hello!
As bash already has:
> if [ -x /usr/sbin/add-shell ]; then
> /usr/sbin/add-shell /bin/bash
> /usr/sbin/add-shell /bin/rbash
> fi
in its postinst
merge 202840 287108
thanks
Hi!
> Bug #155279 is also about su not using pam_env.
Actually, 155279 is about /etc/pam.d/su not using
pam_env.so, while 202840 and 287108 are _more_ about
/bin/su not calling pam_getenvlist() ;-)
But because they have common aim, I now agree that they
can be merged
tags confirmed patch
thanks
Hi!
Please, Tomasz, look into this bugreport:
http://bugs.debian.org/242407
I checked it -- the race is really there.
I think the fix is trivial, the patch against your CVS
version is attached (I have already compiled/checked
it on my system). If I didn't miss somet
tags 271565 confirmed pending
retitle 271565 remove-shell fails when /etc/shells is missing, empty or is to
be emptied
thanks
Hi!
First of all, remove-shell fails in other conditions
than stated in original report.
Nevertheless, the patch fixes the problem.
The bug results in inability to delet
Hi!
On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 03:37:57PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Anyway, this seems to be fixed upstream in Linux-PAM 0.80,
>
> > They took "getpass() considered obsolete" message to
> > heart and implemented their own getpass()? :) (shit, I
> > don't like all these re-inventions of whee
is there a way to disable .bz2 at all in apt
in favor of .gz?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have just downgraded the "apt" pkg from 0.6.41 down
to the 0.5.28.6. This worked even without also
downgrading "apt-utils" and co.
To the moment, this seems to work, so I'll just pin
"apt" to "stable" until the issue is fixed -- sorry, I
don't have enough time to debug it.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Hi!
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 05:36:29PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Yes, I see this (pre-0.80 version):
> > 1. fprintf(stderr, "%s", prompt);
> > 2. tcsetattr(STDIN_FILENO, TCSAFLUSH, ...);
> > 3. read(STDIN_FILENO, ...);
> > 4. tcsetattr(STDIN_FILENO, TCSADRAIN, ...);
>
> > OK. Even having 2
tags 334803 confirmed
thanks
Hi!
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 06:49:35AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Julian Gilbey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Package: login
> > Version: 1:4.0.12-6
> >
> > The issue described in #314727 appears to have reappeared in this
> > version of the package (curren
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 01:59:47AM +0300, Alexander Gattin wrote:
> Well, this is really broken. Sometimes is hangs,
> sometimes suspends.
>
> If I use `sudo su - newuser`, suspend -f works all the
> time AFAIS.
Looks like it starts working after first success.
First `sudo su -
> clone 330247 -1
> reassign -1 manpages-ru
> retitle -1 Please stop providing outdated manpages
> thanks
Hi!
On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 06:13:58AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting Jan Brüninghaus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Package: login
> > Version: 1:4.0.3-39
> > Severity: grave
> > Tags:
1 - 100 of 211 matches
Mail list logo
