control: severity -1 serious
justification: libvirtd upgrades from stretch to buster break causing
apt to fail and requiring the admin to get the systemd units into a
consistent state before things can continue
Unfortunately based on discussion so far this is a complex bug to fix.
Ubuntu's
Guido let me know if you need any help or prod me on IRC if I'm needed.
Will certainly test the result, but if you get stuck would be happy to
spend time on this.
___
Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-systemd-maintainers@alioth-lists.debian.net
control: severity -1 wishlist
control: tags -1 wontfix
Dear Svante:
By repeatedly manipulating the severity of the bug, by removing the
wontfix tag, you are adding flames to a fire that does not need them.
We have procedures for disagreeing with a maintainer's approach to a
bug, and revert
> "Michael" == Michael Biebl writes:
Michael> b/ you need a different way to switch
Michael> over. Reboot into an environment for which you have control
Michael> over, then uninstall systemd/systemd-sysv without
Michael> triggering the removal of most packages.
This is
> "Michael" == Michael Biebl writes:
Michael> Tbh, I'm not sure what kind of answer you expect from me.
Michael> I guess I already provided my feedback here and mentioned
Michael> what kind of solution I prefer. I can repeat this in this
Michael> bug report, but I'm not sure
> "Simon" == Simon McVittie writes:
I'm assuming that the proposal is to change this for bookworm.
It seems like it's too late in the process to change something like this
for bullseye without more explicit and significant harm documented than
you have given so far.
Simon> Rationale:
>>>>> "Simon" == Simon McVittie writes:
Simon> On Mon, 01 Feb 2021 at 11:49:25 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> >>>>> "Simon" == Simon McVittie writes: I'm
>> assuming that the proposal is to change this for bookworm.
Hi.
Pam 1.5.3 adds support for using logind rather than utmp for a couple
of things:
* Counting the number of user sessions in pam_issue
* Determining the time at which the user logged in in pam_timestamp.
If we did use logind, that would mean a dependency from libpam-modules
to
> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
Luca> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 15:42, Richard Lewis
Luca> wrote:
>>
>> Luca Boccassi writes:
>>
>> > Hence, I am not really looking for philosophical discussions or
>> lists > of personal preferences or hypotheticals, but for
> "Santiago" == Santiago Vila writes:
Santiago> Hello. My plan for base-files is to stop overriding the
Santiago> PATH in /etc/profile.
Santiago> Ubuntu did that a long time ago and it's probably the
Santiago> right thing to do.
I'd be happy to pick up the Ubuntu patch to
Hi.
I'm not really swapped in on Debian this weekend; dealing with a
transition for day job.
But quick thoughts.
I'm surprised that systemd-home is a pam auth module.
That is, I wouldn't expect systemd-home to be able to decide whether you
have presented valid credentials to log in.
It may be
> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
Luca>
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/pam_systemd_home.html
It's going to be a long time (a couple of weeks) before I have cycles to
actually look at systemd-home rather than to answer questions with my
pam hat on without
> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
Luca> Ah thanks for the pointer to the file, I had missed that
Luca> somehow in the first reply. I see it now: the pam-config for
Luca> unix.so assumes that if something runs before then everything
Luca> is done already. Unfortunately that
13 matches
Mail list logo
