alternately, rolling back to -25 seems to fix all problems. i'll try your revised package tomorrow afternoon as soon as possible. thankfully, a user messaged me about the issue before i logged out after updating my testing machine. =)
elijah On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Sam Hartman wrote: > Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:52:20 -0400 > From: Sam Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org, debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Pam 0.72-26 critically broken > Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:56:14 -0400 > Resent-From: debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Hi. I uploaded a version of PAM today that fails to minimally work. > If you install this package, the main PAM module (pam_unix) fails to > load. This means that login, su and other programs that ask for a > password all fail. > > Needless to say this is a critical bug. A fixed version of the > package is now available at > http://incoming.debian.org/pam_0.72-27_i386.deb. This package will > replace the broken one in the Debian archive tomorrow afternoon. > > You can gain single user access to your Debian system even with a > broken PAM by booting it with the init=/bin/sh argument. This should > allow you to mount the root filesystem read/write, bring up the > network, download a new package and install it. > > > Needless to say, I apologize for the inconvenience this has caused and > would be happy to help if you have any questions about repairing any > damaged systems. I will be more careful of my testing procedure in > the future and will avoid introducing errors after I have already > confirmed things work. > > > - --Sam > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.6 and Gnu Privacy Guard > <http://www.gnupg.org/> > > iEYEARECAAYFAjs36q0ACgkQ/I12czyGJg9iDwCeOtTwW3zRzCMhMmgsmuh2+KBI > rywAnjMQpMUjBhP6ClI9R2CBcFzPeqon > =URfZ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -- -- $ chown us:us yourbase -R