On Thu, 03 May 2007 18:13:25 -0700
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On to, 2007-05-03 at 13:39 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> My ideal output format would just list "subsystem OK"
>
> > While we're daydreaming, I'd like an empty screen w
On Thu, May 03, 2007 at 08:28:49PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> Version : 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> Upstream Author : MPAA <[EMAIL PR
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonny Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: synce-gnomevfs
Version : 0.10.0
Upstream Author : Fredrik Nilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mattias Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.synce.org/
* License
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:32:45AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> Very good idea. Although the number 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> might look simple it's probably not a good idea to hardcode any number
> like 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 into applications. Abstracting
So you're proposing
Il giorno ven, 04/05/2007 alle 10.59 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli ha scritto:
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:32:45AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> > Very good idea. Although the number 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> > might look simple it's probably not a good idea to hardcode any number
> > like 0
On Friday 04 May 2007 08:45, sean finney wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 07:52 +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote:
> > An unfortunate string of events lead me to upgrade a server from sarge
> > to etch, using the mysql-server-4.1 package and stupidly assuming that
> > a package with the package
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Sune Vuorela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: soprano
Version : x.y.z
Upstream Author : Sebastian Trueg and others
* URL : http://www.kde.org/
* License : LGPL-2
Programming Lang: C++, Qt
Description : A Qt int
Dear list...
someone (curse you, Matthijs) motivated me to dump NIS in favor of LDAP
for user accounts on my small home net. Good thing I did it during my
vacation because it's not as trivial as I hoped.
I'm unhappy with the outcome of the bug #298148 (kdebase-bin: kcheckpass
needs setuid bit for
In Thu, 03 May 2007 13:39:32 -0700, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I think that would give you the best of both worlds, particularly if it's
>combined with logging so that the *full* output, without any
>prettification, goes into a file on disk somewhere.
Agreed, with the option of havin
[Peter Samuelson]
> Uh ... I thought the point of your project was to help package
> maintainers. Obviously if the maintainer has put something in
> experimental, he has already done the work to package it!
>From my point of view, the goal of utnubu project is helping package
maintainers hel
Hi,
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:56:01AM -0300, Rodrigo Tavares wrote:
> Today, i use a makefile with two lines :
[...]
I think your questions are more on-topic on the debian-mentors mailing
list.
thanks,
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe".
[Christoph Haas]
> I'm unhappy with the outcome of the bug #298148 (kdebase-bin: kcheckpass
> needs setuid bit for ldap authentication). When using libnss-ldap and
> libpam-ldap (optionally) people who lock their screen in KDE will not be
> able to unlock the screen and may (like me) lose data bec
Am Freitag 04 Mai 2007 11:23 schrieb Sune Vuorela:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Sune Vuorela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> * Package name: soprano
> Version : x.y.z
> Upstream Author : Sebastian Trueg and others
> * URL : http://www.kde.org/
> * License
Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Josselin Mouette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> Version : 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
> Upstream Author : MPAA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL
Petter,
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:29:07PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Christoph Haas]
> > I'm unhappy with the outcome of the bug #298148 (kdebase-bin: kcheckpass
> > needs setuid bit for ldap authentication). When using libnss-ldap and
> > libpam-ldap (optionally) people who lock their
Christoph,
> Thanks in advance for the hints. I'm taking notes already to document
> this better.
please post a link as soon as you have some documentation online. I'd
think that a wiki would be a good place for it. pam-ldap/libnss-ldap is
missing a good documentation definitely.
Cheers,
Bernd
Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Il giorno ven, 04/05/2007 alle 10.59 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli ha scritto:
>> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:32:45AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
>> > Very good idea. Although the number 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
>> > might look simple it's pro
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 07:55:14PM +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> Christoph,
>
> > Thanks in advance for the hints. I'm taking notes already to document
> > this better.
>
> please post a link as soon as you have some documentation online. I'd
> think that a wiki would be a good place for it. pam-
SU EMPRESA TODAVÍA NO ESTÁ EN INTERNET?
Internet es el medio de difusión que ha tenido el mayor crecimiento en
la historia, por lo que tener un sitio web y una dirección de correo
electrónico resulta esencial en las comunicaciones y los negocios de hoy
en día.
Un sitio web se transform
On Friday 04 May 2007 05:53:39 Marc Haber wrote:
> >I think that would give you the best of both worlds, particularly if
> > it's combined with logging so that the *full* output, without any
> >prettification, goes into a file on disk somewhere.
>
> Agreed, with the option of having the whole blurb
On Friday 04 May 2007 11:59:20 Roger Leigh wrote:
> Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Il giorno ven, 04/05/2007 alle 10.59 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli ha
scritto:
> >> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:32:45AM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> >> > Very good idea. Although the number 09F911
On Friday 04 May 2007 05:23:17 Christoph Haas wrote:
> libpam-ldap (optionally) people who lock their screen in KDE will not be
> able to unlock the screen and may (like me) lose data because they
> finally give up and Ctrl+Alt+Backspace. :( It turned out that unlocking
Unrelated to your *actual*
On 5/4/07, Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 04 May 2007 11:59:20 Roger Leigh wrote:
> Federico Di Gregorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Il giorno ven, 04/05/2007 alle 10.59 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli ha
scritto:
> >> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 10:32:45AM +0200, Christoph Haa
Le vendredi 04 mai 2007 à 14:43 -0400, Bryan Donlan a écrit :
> > Well, since it would be nice to have a console tool
> > (i.e. /usr/bin/09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0) to print out this number
> > for use in shell scripts, as well as having bindings for scripting
> > languages, I'd like to see t
On Friday 04 May 2007 12:34:23 Wesley J. Landaker wrote:
> On Friday 04 May 2007 05:23:17 Christoph Haas wrote:
> > libpam-ldap (optionally) people who lock their screen in KDE will not
> > be able to unlock the screen and may (like me) lose data because they
> > finally give up and Ctrl+Alt+Backsp
I suppose you have your immediate problem solved here, but this information
might be useful for others sometime later, so:
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 07:29:17PM +0200, Christoph Haas wrote:
> > This sounds like you have set up LDAP authentication incorrectly, as I
> > am able to lock the screen with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Vincent Fourmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: g95
Version : 0.9
Upstream Author : Andy Vaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://g95.org/
* License : GPL with exception for linking
Programming Lang: C, Fortran
D
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 12:17:03PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> If you use libnss-ldap+pam_unix for authentication, authentication involves
> the system querying the password hash from LDAP across the network, and
> using pam_unix to attempt to authenticate against it. If normal users do
> no
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 05:33:45PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > If you use libnss-ldap+pam_unix for authentication, authentication involves
> > the system querying the password hash from LDAP across the network, and
> > using pam_unix to attempt to authenticate against it. If normal users
[Christoph Haas]
> Okay, so libpam-ldap is mandatory in that case? Good to know. Most
> of the documentation I found said that only libnss-ldap is needed
> for login and libpam-ldap's only use is for changing the password
> over LDAP.
Yes, pam is needed to do proper authentication (password check
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 11:51:02PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> Yes, pam is needed to do proper authentication (password checking),
> and nss is needed to find information about users and groups. Yes,
> you can use nss to find password hashes and authenticate locally after
> fetching the ha
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:49:40PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> It means that pam_unix is able to access your shadow hash on behalf of the
> user, when using root privileges (which is expected and required in the case
> where you want to support password changes via pam_ldap); and that if
> pa
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 11:51:02PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>
> Actually, you got it backwards, as explained above. pam-ldap isn't
> using the password hash to check the password. It is passing the
> password over to the LDAP server (using an LDAP bind), and letting the
> LDAP server de
Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Vincent Fourmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: g95
Do you happen to know whether g95 uses the same ABI as either gfortran
or g77? Because if not, maintaining FORTRAN library packages in Debian
is going to become
On Friday 04 May 2007 16:41, Kevin B. McCarty wrote:
> Do you happen to know whether g95 uses the same ABI as either gfortran
> or g77? Because if not, maintaining FORTRAN library packages in Debian
> is going to become even more complicated, unless we are satisfied with
> just providing the g95 c
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 06:19:34PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:49:40PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It means that pam_unix is able to access your shadow hash on behalf of the
> > user, when using root privileges (which is expected and required in the case
> >
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 04:39:02PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 06:19:34PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:49:40PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > It means that pam_unix is able to access your shadow hash on behalf of the
> > > user, w
Hi,
After some discussion on IRC I was about to file a bug on the kernel,
but I'm still not convinced if that's appropiate, as there are various
ways to tackle this. So, please, give me your opinion on this.
I found that some very critical cmdline options for booting aren't
honoured anymore (I h
[Martín Ferrari]
> So, this could be handled by various ways:
> - Putting notices in relevant places so that everybody can understand
> what's happening (release notes, FAQs, package documentation..)
> - Compiling with CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE=y (Ubuntu does this)
A growing number of people no longer n
> On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 11:51:02PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> > Actually, you got it backwards, as explained above. pam-ldap isn't
> > using the password hash to check the password. It is passing the
> > password over to the LDAP server (using an LDAP bind), and letting the
> > LDAP s
40 matches
Mail list logo
