Hello,
Peter Baumgarten, le Thu 13 Mar 2014 18:46:30 -0500, a écrit :
> I figured out why sudo was not building, unless I explicitly state a
> umask in my .profile that is NOT umask 000, which it seemed like it was.
> sudo will fail some permission checks. If put either umask 002 or 022
> in .prof
I figured out why sudo was not building, unless I explicitly state a
umask in my .profile that is NOT umask 000, which it seemed like it was.
sudo will fail some permission checks. If put either umask 002 or 022
in .profile sudo will build. So is there another bug with default file
permissions then
Peter Baumgarten, le Fri 14 Mar 2014 22:33:42 -0500, a écrit :
> On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 10:15 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Another way is to just fix lockf in glibc (for now it is just returning
> > ENOSYS), it seems sudo simply locks the whole file, so it would be the
> > simple case to implem
On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 10:15 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Another way is to just fix lockf in glibc (for now it is just returning
> ENOSYS), it seems sudo simply locks the whole file, so it would be the
> simple case to implement.
If I did want to fix lockf in glibc where would I find the lockf
Hello,
Peter Baumgarten, le Wed 12 Mar 2014 22:16:19 -0500, a écrit :
> I simply created a sudo directory and then ran apt-get --build source
> sudo as a normal user, and the part of the script where this is
> happening is debian/rules build inside of sudo-1.8.9p5 directory. The
> question I am as
On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 10:15 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> No, it's rather the locking function which spuriously fails. The
> debian/patches/use-flock-on-hurd.diff patch is supposed to make sudo use
> flock instead of lockf, but that doesn't seem to actually happen. Some
> autoconf patching is pro
Hello,
Peter Baumgarten, le Tue 11 Mar 2014 16:04:04 -0500, a écrit :
> I looked through the
> bugzilla list and did not know which bug I should tackle, but I was
> annoyed that I could not shutdown as a normal user because of the visudo
> problem, so I thought why not tackle that bug?
That's exa
On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 10:29 +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> You don't happen to be a student willing to do this as a Google Summer of
> Code project? :-)
Yes I am a student hoping to get involved with hurd development through
Google Summer of Code. I saw on the application that I should have
subm
Hi!
On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:44:36 -0500, Peter Baumgarten
wrote:
> I'm trying to be a hurd developer by jumping straight in and trying to
> tackle a bug.
So, welcome to the team! :-)
> This may not be a hurd bug, but I only see it with the
> hurd version of sudo. I am trying to figure out why
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 02:44:36AM -0500, Peter Baumgarten wrote:
> I'm trying to be a hurd developer by jumping straight in and trying to
> tackle a bug. This may not be a hurd bug, but I only see it with the
> hurd version of sudo. I am trying to figure out why I get this message
> "visudo: /etc/
I forgot to answer the other question: no, there is no support for lsof
on the Hurd yet.
Samuel
Hello,
Peter Baumgarten, le Tue 11 Mar 2014 02:44:36 -0500, a écrit :
> I'm trying to be a hurd developer by jumping straight in and trying to
> tackle a bug.
Good!
> This may not be a hurd bug, but I only see it with the
> hurd version of sudo.
It is a hurd bug.
> I am trying to figure out wh
Hey everyone,
I'm trying to be a hurd developer by jumping straight in and trying to
tackle a bug. This may not be a hurd bug, but I only see it with the
hurd version of sudo. I am trying to figure out why I get this message
"visudo: /etc/sudoers busy, try again later" when I run visudo as root.
I
13 matches
Mail list logo
