Russ Allbery wrote:
> Josh Triplett writes:
> > That looks really promising. What would it take to get the default
> > /etc/issue changed to include all the necessary information to make the
> > current dynamic motd obsolete?
>
> ssh support for /etc/issue escapes, which seems incredibly unlikel
Josh Triplett writes:
> That looks really promising. What would it take to get the default
> /etc/issue changed to include all the necessary information to make the
> current dynamic motd obsolete?
ssh support for /etc/issue escapes, which seems incredibly unlikely. I
certainly wouldn't want t
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Peter Spiess-Knafl"
* Package name: vncterm
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Johannes E. Schindelin, Christian Beier
* URL : https://github.com/LibVNC/vncterm
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : Expo
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> Modern agetty allows escapes in /etc/issue (see section ISSUE ESCAPES
> in agetty(8)) to insert values directly from uname(2) and /usr/lib/os-release.
> It should be plenty enough for the common case of displaying
> the distribution name and kernel version. Some
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:56:33AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Michael Biebl wrote:
> > I'm also no longer convinced, that running a huge shell machinery (as
> > root) during login via PAM is a good idea.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > If we go the update-motd route, I'd like to see the update-motd calls be
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Tycho Andersen
* Package name: python-xcffib
Version : 0.1.10
Upstream Author : Tycho Andersen
* URL : https://github.com/tych0/xcffib
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Python
Description : A drop in repla
Riley Baird writes:
> Sort of off topic, but as far as I can tell, the historical purpose of
> MOTD was to send a message to all users of a system. Is it still used
> for this?
Yes. Stanford used, and presumably still uses, this pretty regularly for
head nodes of compute environments to alert u
Niko Tyni writes ("Re: new pre-dependency: perl{,-base,-modules} -> dpkg (>=
1.17.17)"):
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:15:04AM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > I've not looked into the details yet, but just to comment that there's
> > been talk about possibly reverting that fix, because in some erro
found 568008 linux-2.6/3.1.8-2
found 568008 linux-2.6/3.0.0-3
found 568008 linux-2.6/2.6.32-5
fixed 568008 linux/3.2.21-1
found 568008 linux/3.16.0-4
submitter 568008 Patrick Häcker
thanks
On Sat, 24 Jan 2015, Patrick Häcker wrote:
> I could not find the reason why #568008 got archived again. Cou
On Saturday, 24. January 2015, 17:00:05 Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>
> I did not read that bug report, but usually maintainers prefer to have
> a new bug report (with a reference to the old bug) in the case of
> regression.
Ok, thanks a lot for the tips. I will do this next time.
Patrick
signature.a
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Patrick Häcker wrote:
>
> I could not find the reason why #568008 got archived again. Could someone
> please tell me what I have to do to avoid having it automatically archived in
> its current state?
> Or was it a mistake to reopen a bug when I assume there is a r
Hi,
I could not find the reason why #568008 got archived again. Could someone
please tell me what I have to do to avoid having it automatically archived in
its current state?
Or was it a mistake to reopen a bug when I assume there is a regression?
Thanks in advance for enlighten me.
Kind regar
12 matches
Mail list logo
