Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: jfsutils
~# uname -a
Linux x 2.6.24-17-openvz #1 SMP Wed May 7 13:59:18 MSD 2008 x86_64 GNU/Linux
~# dpkg -l jfs*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-f/Unpacked/Failed-cfg/Half-inst/t-aWait/T-pend
|/ Err?=(none)/Ho
Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: linux-source-2.6.24
Affected system:
Description:Ubuntu 7.10
Release:7.10
Description:Ubuntu 8.04
Release:8.04
Affected kernel flavours: any kernel build from 2.6.24-source
See detail problem description in LKML archive:
http:
** Attachment added: "fixing patch for from upstream"
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/15106795/kernel%20BUG%20at%20drivers_scsi_aic7xxx_aic79xx_osm.c%3A1490%21.eml
--
linux-image-2.6.24-* w/ aic79xx crash under heavy I/O load
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/238118
You received this bug notific
Public bug reported:
getlogin() call in new glibc checks /proc/self/loginuid presence and
trust its value as most safe source (due it's audit-related nature). But
default /etc/pam.d/common-account doesn't contains entry to
pam_loginuid.so which modify /proc/self/loginuid properly. This breaks
getl
** Description changed:
getlogin() call in new glibc checks /proc/self/loginuid presence and
trust its value as most safe source (due it's audit-related nature). But
default /etc/pam.d/common-account doesn't contains entry to
pam_loginuid.so which modify /proc/self/loginuid properly. This
More to go:
Currently, /etc/pam.d/common-account (to be more correct, /etc/pam.d
/common-session) doesn't differ sessions like ordinary (login,sshd,crond
etc) and special (su and sudo). So my proposal incorrect - better add
pam_loginuid to ordinary sessions and leave special sessions untouched.
-
