On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 01:58:14AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> While there are a few bits of that transition tracker still red, the
> current target is to work on the list of autopkgtest failures shown on
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/python3-defaults in order to get the
> addition of 3.13 as a
On Tue, Dec 17, 2024 at 12:53:42PM +, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 01:58:14AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> > [...]
> > * spyder: #1088068/#1089054.
>
> I'm struggling with this one; I've asked at
> https://github.com/spyder-ide/spyder/issues/23074
> for help, but nothing so
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Ansgar 🙀, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 16:21:03 +0100, a ecrit:
> > And it is actively harmful as if one edits the example configuration to
> > have a useful configuration as dpkg will start annoying admins with
> > "the example configuration has changed; what do you want to do"
>
Hi Mark, and thanks for the heads-up,
CC'ing the LTS mailing list for visibility. BCC'ing debian-devel.
El 19/12/24 a las 17:50, Mark Hindley escribió:
> Hello,
>
> I recently completed salvaging of src:ucf[1].
>
> As part of code cleanup I discovered a variable inherited from the environment
>
Noah Meyerhans (2024-12-19):
> I'm not sure it's the case that most of those other systems install
> Priority: standard. Debootstrap certainly doesn't by itself, and I
> don't think the debuerreotype tool for building OCI images does either.
> In any case, your point still stands. I'll re-assign
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024, 09:15 Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 general
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:24:49PM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> > Regarding tasksel vs. Priority, the latter has a potential for a much
> > wider impact: lots of Debian system are installed without d-i and/or
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:28:52PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 09:53:27PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > > > > In theory, if we don't want to explicitly install the package in d-i,
> > > > > another possibility might be to bump it to Priority: standard and let
> > >
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 09:53:27PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote:
> > > > In theory, if we don't want to explicitly install the package in d-i,
> > > > another possibility might be to bump it to Priority: standard and let
> > > > tasksel install it. I'm not sure what the tradeoffs might be that
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 12:12:13PM -0500, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
[..]
> > > In theory, if we don't want to explicitly install the package in d-i,
> > > another possibility might be to bump it to Priority: standard and let
> > > tasksel install it. I'm not sure what the tradeoffs might be that would
Hello,
I recently completed salvaging of src:ucf[1].
As part of code cleanup I discovered a variable inherited from the environment
which is then passed to eval[2]. Unintended code execution is trivial to
demonstrate. To my mind, this is a coding oversight. As the patch in #1089015
shows, the fi
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:58:06PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > And it is actively harmful as if one edits the example configuration to
> > have a useful configuration as dpkg will start annoying admins with
> > "the example configuration has changed; what do you want to do"
> > messages.
>
>
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 general
Bug #1090811 [src:debian-installer] debian-installer: install
linux-sysctl-defaults by default
Bug reassigned from package 'src:debian-installer' to 'general'.
No longer marked as found in versions debian-installer/20240914.
Ignoring request to a
Ansgar 🙀, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 16:21:03 +0100, a ecrit:
> On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 11:16 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Also, /etc would thus be full of empty /etc/$proj directories? I don't
> > see the point of not just putting the example files there? Why making it
> > more difficult for the admi
Hi,
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 11:16 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Also, /etc would thus be full of empty /etc/$proj directories? I don't
> see the point of not just putting the example files there? Why making it
> more difficult for the admin to configure their server?
Examples belong to /usr/share
Hi,
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 12:34 +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:00:03 +0100
> Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 10:09 +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> > >
> > > Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
> > > subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux. YMMVÂ
> >
> > Pleas
>
>> What group of idiots came up with a system where instead of having all of
>> the configs in maximum of two places (/etc | ~/.config) have now spread them
>> out across five completely separate directory trees?
>
> The group is called "The Linux Userspace API (UAPI) Group", and according
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Edward Betts
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: django-auditlog
Version : 3.0.0
Upstream Author : Jan-Jelle Kester
* URL : https://github.com/jazzband/django-auditlog
* Lic
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 07:08 -0600, rhys wrote:
>
> What group of idiots came up with a system where instead of having all of the
> configs in maximum of two places (/etc | ~/.config) have now spread them out
> across five completely separate directory trees?
The group is called "The Linux User
>>>
>>> $ cp /usr/lib/$proj/foo.conf /etc/$proj/
>>
>> Which is not trivial, really.
Well, it IS, but in the same way that "rm -rf /" is trivial. It's easy to do,
but some non-trivial thought should occur before doing it.
> Put another way: would it really be /usr/lib/$proj, or
>
> this is what can be called "old style" overrides.
Things get to be "old" because they actually work well.
> The modern way of doing it is the "stateless" style, most commonly associated
> with systemd but used by plenty of other projects, plus "drop-in" .d
> directories.
>
> The basic
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:34:57 +0100, Frank Guthausen
wrote:
>If my suggestions do not apply to situations where systemd is used,
>I'd suggest systemd advocates to stay quiet because the topic does
>not concern them
That nicely helps me to put your suggestion in the correct
compartment, which is th
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:00:03 +0100
Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 10:09 +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> >
> > Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
> > subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux. YMMV
>
> Please keep such messages to appropriate mailing lists such as the
> Devuan list
As
Hi,
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 10:09 +0100, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 09:01:09 +0100
> Marco d'Itri wrote:
> >
> > No: the expected default for systemd-managed services is to use
> > /etc/$SERVICE/ .
>
> Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
> subdistribution of Debian GNU/Lin
Samuel Thibault, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:26:12 +0100, a ecrit:
> Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:22:02 +0100, a ecrit:
> > On 19/12/24 10:19, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:15:47 +0100, a ecrit:
> > > > * Admin can override the standard configuratio
On Dec 19, Henrik Ahlgren wrote:
> Take bind9 named(8) for example – it can chroot (with -t) but AFAIK
> Debian does not use it by default, and I think using the various
Because it makes managing it much harder, since /etc/bind/ then moves to
/var/.
Systemd directives like ProtectSystem, ReadOnl
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 10:09:41 +0100, Frank Guthausen
wrote:
>Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
>subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux.
Bullshit.
--
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse i
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 18:03:06 +0900
Simon Richter wrote:
> On 12/19/24 16:17, Frank Guthausen wrote:
>
> > A lot of packages do default configuration in /etc/project.conf and
> > admin related stuff in /etc/project.d/whatsoever.conf to separate
> > the distribution part from local overrides.
>
Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:22:02 +0100, a ecrit:
> On 19/12/24 10:19, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:15:47 +0100, a ecrit:
> > > * Admin can override the standard configuration via /etc/$proj/foo.conf
> > [...]
> > > Upstream projects are moving
On 19/12/24 10:19, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:15:47 +0100, a ecrit:
* Admin can override the standard configuration via /etc/$proj/foo.conf
[...]
Upstream projects are moving to this style. I hope that one day Debian
packages will stop shipping files under
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mike Gabriel
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
* Package name: buteo-sync-plugins-social
Version : 0.4.27
Upstream Contact: https://sailfishos.org/contact/
* URL : https://github.com/sailfishos/buteo-sync-plugins-social
Gioele Barabucci, le jeu. 19 déc. 2024 10:15:47 +0100, a ecrit:
> * Admin can override the standard configuration via /etc/$proj/foo.conf
[...]
> Upstream projects are moving to this style. I hope that one day Debian
> packages will stop shipping files under /etc.
Having pre-filled configuration f
On 19/12/24 08:17, Frank Guthausen wrote:
A lot of packages do default configuration in /etc/project.conf and
admin related stuff in /etc/project.d/whatsoever.conf to separate the
distribution part from local overrides.
Hi,
this is what can be called "old style" overrides.
The modern way of d
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 09:01:09 +0100
Marco d'Itri wrote:
>
> No: the expected default for systemd-managed services is to use
> /etc/$SERVICE/ .
Debian GNU/Systemd is only an unofficial
subdistribution of Debian GNU/Linux. YMMV
--
kind regards
Frank
pgp3MLhxRVRIo.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digita
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 11:04 +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> I would advise against this simplistic view on security and "hardening" -
> it often makes false sense of security instead of real security.
Yes I agree, also blindly applied "hardening" settings can cause the
program not function correct
Hi,
On 12/19/24 16:17, Frank Guthausen wrote:
A lot of packages do default configuration in /etc/project.conf and
admin related stuff in /etc/project.d/whatsoever.conf to separate the
distribution part from local overrides.
It depends on the package.
Some packages have a "registry-style" con
17.12.2024 00:31, Henrik Ahlgren wrote:
Anyway, systemd's hardening features are so easy and effective that I
would really like to see not only postfix, but ALL services use them as
much as possible. Why we still have major packages like nginx shipping
without any hardening out-of-the-box?
I wo
On Dec 19, Frank Guthausen wrote:
> Is it reasonable to use this idea as "best practice" and implement it
> into Debian style administration recommendations? It works very well
No: the expected default for systemd-managed services is to use
/etc/$SERVICE/ .
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Descr
37 matches
Mail list logo
