Control: reopen -1 !
Control: retitle -1 Make PE32+ binaries non-executable and enable
security features
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 3:23 PM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Why is this a bug in systemd then?
A wishlist severity seemed appropriate to resolve this issue,
hopefully once and for al
Hi Michael,
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:12 AM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> It just felt weird that all packages with PE executable either ignored
> the lintian error or added an override.
Thank you for this remark. I noticed that grub2 overrides similar
tags. We will look into it.
> Since I can't real
Hi Michael,
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 3:23 PM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Why is this a bug in systemd then?
Dunno. I did not file the bug. I just know it's not in Lintian. :)
> If ld creates those files with the executable bit set, it feels weird
> that we have to work around that by manually removi
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 05:32:51 -0700 Felix Lechner
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:27 AM Chris Lamb wrote:
> >
> > This begs the question; why cannot the systemd packaging remove the
> > executable bits from these files?
>
> On my testing system post-buster, the executable bits are still
Control: reassign -1 systemd
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 5:48 AM Chris Lamb wrote:
>
> Can you clarify whom you are directing this query to? (I am unable to
> answer it.)
It was a matter of politeness, I suppose.
Kind regards,
Felix
Felix Lechner wrote:
> > This begs the question; why cannot the systemd packaging remove the
> > executable bits from these files?
>
> On my testing system post-buster, the executable bits are still set:
[…]
> May I please assign this bug to package systemd?
Can you clarify whom you are directin
Hi,
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:27 AM Chris Lamb wrote:
>
> This begs the question; why cannot the systemd packaging remove the
> executable bits from these files?
On my testing system post-buster, the executable bits are still set:
$ ls -ald /usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 5973
tags 926823 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi Michael,
> Am 11.04.19 um 01:22 schrieb Felix Lechner:
> > It's just that the lintian tag is not triggered when
> > the [executable] bit is off.
>
> That much I figured :-)
This begs the question; why cannot the systemd packaging remove the
executable bits from
Am 11.04.19 um 01:22 schrieb Felix Lechner:
> It's just that the lintian tag is not
> triggered when the bit is off.
That much I figured :-)
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digit
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 4:16 PM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> Those bits are set by ld respectively objcopy when the binaries are
> generated. Are you implying that ld/objcopy should not do that?
No, you may well need it. It's just that the lintian tag is not
triggered when the bit is off.
Am 10.04.19 um 23:46 schrieb Felix Lechner:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:33 PM Michael Biebl wrote:
>>
>> systemd ships EFI binaries which are PE executables.
>>
>> usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxia32.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
>> usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxx64.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
>> u
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:33 PM Michael Biebl wrote:
>
> systemd ships EFI binaries which are PE executables.
>
> usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxia32.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
> usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxx64.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
> usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/systemd-bootia32.efi [amd64,
Package: lintian
Version: 2.12.0
Severity: normal
Hi,
systemd ships EFI binaries which are PE executables.
This triggers lintian:
executable-not-elf-or-script
usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxia32.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
usr/lib/systemd/boot/efi/linuxx64.efi.stub [amd64, i386]
usr/lib/sy
13 matches
Mail list logo
