On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 09:04:09AM +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote: > Jeroen van Wolffelaar schrieb am Mittwoch, den 17. Januar 2007: > > > severity 318123 important > > thanks > > > > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 11:36:02AM -0500, Michael Stone wrote: > > > The best solution for now is probably just to conflict with > > > libpam-opensc > > > > NMU'd with this 'solution' -- downgrading this bug and its sister one > > accordingly. I don't consider this bug adequately solved, but this > > solution IMHO trumps having nothing at all and hence no xlock in etch. > > > > NMU patch attached. > I don't think this is enough. As we detected the bug we could reproduce it > with several other PAM Plugins, for example if I recall correctly the opie > pam plugin. So just conflicting against opensc wouldn't be enough.
If you see the patch, you'll notice that I added conflicts to both libpam-p11 and libpam-opie. Indeed, a crash has been reported with libpam-opie too in a different report (the one merged to the older RC bug). If there are any other crashing combinations, please report them. I do not currently believe that "some other PAM plugins might cause xlock to crash also" is a substantial enough suspicion to warrant blocking this package from etch. --Jeroen -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
