Bug#898945: Bug #898945: grub-installer: Installing to a raid 1 set on NVMe devices does not work

It looks like the whole section handling raid arrays is missing from Debian, so this patch does not apply. Not sure why the raid handling patches have not been folded back into Debian.

Bug#898262: sfdisk: wrong offset calculation

On 5/9/2018 7:34 AM, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > There's approximately 58G available at the end of the device (from cyl > 3538944 to 125042688). Yes, but there is also 3 mb near the beginning of the device. > According to the manpage, I think adding a new partition for a vfat > filesystem filling

Bug#887225: gparted should depend on e2fsprogs explicitly

On 1/21/2018 9:45 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > I'm going to make a sweeping assumption here that e2fsprogs belongs > among all the other filesystem specific stuff that gparted currently has > specified as: Pretty much, yea.

Bug#888084: libparted-fs-resize0: undefined symbols: needs -lparted -luuid

On 1/23/2018 1:13 AM, Paul Wise wrote: > libparted-fs-resize.so needs to link with -lparted -luuid, see the > output of adequate, symtree and objdump below. I detected this on amd64 > but the Debian build log scanner also detected dpkg-buildpackage > complaining about it on other architectures,

Bug#883971: gparted won't start on Wayland

forcemerge 880601 883971 thanks This has been worked around in the latest version of gparted in unstable/testing, though the underlying bug is in gdm3. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#883812: gparted: Please don't use --enable-xhost-root

On 12/7/2017 3:48 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > Please don't use --enable-xhost-root in Debian's gparted package. This > ugly workaround was introduced upstream in > https://git.gnome.org/browse/gparted/commit/?id=f38ccd02 > > However, it only works because gparted still uses gtk2 and will stop >

Bug#880601: gdm fails to give wayland an Xauthority file, preventing running applications as root

FYI, this appears to be a quite extensive list of debian applications that are now broken by this issue: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#880601: gdm fails to give wayland an Xauthority file, preventing running applications as root

forwarded 880601 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=789867 affects 880601 + gparted synaptic thanks On 11/3/2017 10:26 AM, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Please forward this request upstream. We are unlikely to add a patch for this. It is a shame that you are unwilling to make a simple

Bug#880601: gdm fails to give wayland an Xauthority file, preventing running applications as root

On 11/2/2017 2:46 PM, Simon McVittie wrote: > Wayland is designed to be per-uid. If you want X11, I would suggest > using X11. XWayland will use whichever authentication method you want, and the MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE has worked quite well for a very long time, even in the presence of multiple user

Bug#880601: gdm fails to give wayland an Xauthority file, preventing running applications as root

Package: gdm3 Version: 3.26.1-3 The man page for gdm3 states that it will create an XAUTHORITY file in /var/run/gdm3 and set the environment variable to point to it. It does not do this when running wayland. Instead it leaves Xwayland configured to allow connections only from local processes

Bug#878843: util-linux: fsck on btrfs /home hangs, stalling boot

On 10/18/2017 3:54 AM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > Accessing /home leads to a blocked process. The reason is that (for > numerous years, due to reasons I don't remember) I had > x-systemd.automount in my fstab for /home That makes sense. Now I wonder why is fsck trying to open /home? You run it

Bug#878843: util-linux: fsck on btrfs /home hangs, stalling boot

On 10/17/2017 2:42 AM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote: > close(3)= 0 > open("/home", O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK|O_DIRECTORY|O_CLOEXECstrace: Process 1677 > detached > So it hangs in a call to open() on /home? That looks like a kernel bug. Is /home mounted at the time, or is

Bug#877016: Time to drop cpufrequtils?

On 9/28/2017 9:51 AM, Mattia Dongili wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 03:16:52PM -0400, Phil Susi wrote: >> Package: cpufrequtils >> Version: 008-1 > ... >> is the case, should cpufrequtils not be removed now? > > Yes, indeed it should. Thanks for nagging. > Th

Bug#877016: Time to drop cpufrequtils?

Package: cpufrequtils Version: 008-1 In your last changelog entry from 2012, you mentioned that this should be the last time this package is packaged, as it was being replaced by cpupowerutils. It appears that cpupowerutils is part of the upstream kernel source and built in the

Bug#732054: util-linux: Add cron job for regular SSD trimming

On 7/11/2017 11:23 AM, Josh Triplett wrote: >> There are two main methods for doing this, synchronously using the >> "discard" mount option or asynchronously using fstrim [2]. Colin King did >> some extensive benchmarking and found that on desktops and servers you >> usually want a cron'ed fstrim

Bug#864806: fstrim: -a doesn't trim all mounted filesystems

On 6/16/2017 6:17 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > As can be seen in the while loop at: > http://sources.debian.net/src/util-linux/2.29.2-1/sys-utils/fstrim.c/#L205 > ... the code tries to iterate over all mounted filesystems and then > skip over ones that should not be considered (pseudo

Bug#863980: parted: improperly claims bad alignment

On 6/2/2017 7:11 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > alternately, for dealing with this specific case, it seems likely that > -1 is intended to mean "100%". Perhaps parted could just DWIM in that > case ;) -1 actually means to the very last sector of the disk. If you mean 100%, then you need to

Bug#863980: parted: improperly claims bad alignment

On 6/2/2017 9:44 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Start? 4MiB > End? -1 > Warning: The resulting partition is not properly aligned for best performance. >

Bug#861749: apt-cdrom needs --release option

Package: apt Version: 1.2.19 Please add a --release option to apt-cdrom so that it can be asked not to pick up other releases it finds on the installation medium. I ask because at least in Ubuntu, we get many thousands of installation failure reports each year because people reuse the same USB

Bug#856968: /usr/bin/whereis: does not find multiarch libraries

On 3/8/2017 12:57 PM, Ben Longbons wrote: > Since multiarch is a Debian-specific change, upstream has nothing to > do with this. Looks to me like Debian multiarch decided to start putting libraries in different architecture specific subdirectories of /lib, and whereis simply has not been updated

Bug#854627: (no subject)

retitle 854627 root applications will not run under wayland reassign 854627 src:wayland thanks It seems that wayland has made a silly policy decision to disallow root applications from connecting to the display server.

Bug#439409: Gparted should not "hand-check" permissions

On 11/10/2016 9:03 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > This is from the mkfs.ext2 man page: ext isn't the only filesystem.

Bug#439409: Gparted should not "hand-check" permissions

On 11/9/2016 3:26 PM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:57:23AM -0500, Phil Susi wrote: >> On 11/9/2016 9:43 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: >>> unless root has set up fstab accordingly, to name but one variant. > >> fstab has nothing to do with it

Bug#439409: Gparted should not "hand-check" permissions

On 11/9/2016 9:43 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > unless root has set up fstab accordingly, to name but one variant. fstab has nothing to do with it. That only lets you mount and unmount existing filesystems. > This is a red herring. Hand-checking permissions in an application > is unnecessary

Bug#439409: Gparted should not "hand-check" permissions

On 11/9/2016 3:43 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > I have to concur with Stefan on this. My use case is even more > stupid -- no "real" device, but just a disk image as a file. > > Fdisk "just works" on that, whereas gparted... see above. > > With all this VM rage of late, this kind of use cases

Bug#544317: closed by Andreas Henriksson <andr...@fatal.se> (Re: wall: outputs "ÿ" (0xFF) as "\377")

On 11/6/2016 2:39 PM, Bjarni Ingi Gislason wrote: > "These functions check whether c, which must have the value of an > unsigned char or EOF, ...". > > When the code is compiled with "-funsigned-char" the output is correct. > > This is a fundamental flaw in the cc-standard. The program

Bug#819488: gparted crash with a libparted backtrace

On 11/3/2016 11:37 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote: > Phillip, did you have a chance to look at making parted not crashing > if there is only one unallocated sector between partitions? Mattia, do > you still consider this bug RC? thanks! I have not had time to work on it yet.

Bug#667965: #667965 - eatmydata: Does not properly handle fsync/fdatasync on invalid file handles

On 10/18/2016 2:27 AM, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Petter Reinholdtsen] >> This make me believe libeatmydata should change to behave according to the >> POSIX specification. > > And just to make it more clear why I believe this. My understanding of > eatmydata > is that it should make the

Bug#815922: runuser tty hijacking via TIOCSTI ioctl

On 2/29/2016 1:29 PM, up201407...@alunos.dcc.fc.up.pt wrote: > He said looking into it, he didn't find any legitimate uses of such ioctl. That was the other thing I was wondering about: why would such a silly and security problematic ioctl exist in the first place? I guess that answers it, and

Bug#815922: runuser tty hijacking via TIOCSTI ioctl

On 2/27/2016 4:23 AM, up201407...@alunos.dcc.fc.up.pt wrote: > And yes, there would be no job control if you started a shell from > there. This is why in "su" setsid() is called only with "-c", partially > fixing the issue. If one would to "su - user" it would still be vulnerable. That isn't

Bug#815922: runuser tty hijacking via TIOCSTI ioctl

On 2/25/2016 1:51 PM, up201407...@alunos.dcc.fc.up.pt wrote: > When executing a program via "runuser -u nonpriv program" the > nonpriv session can > escape to the parent session by using the TIOCSTI ioctl to push > characters into the > terminal's input buffer, allowing privilege escalation. >

Bug#812589: fsck -M has stopped working

On 1/25/2016 11:16 AM, sacrificial-spam-addr...@horizon.com wrote: > The "802" is the root= argument passed to the kernel by the boot loader. > Major device 8, minor 2. What I don't understand is why libmount thinks > it's a file name (in $PWD, no less). The boot loader should be passing

Bug#808380: mount: unknown filesystem type 'vfat'

On 12/21/2015 11:32 AM, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote: > Apparently not. :-( > > I can at least confirm that a reboot solved the problem. Hrm... that sounds like a bug in kmod then... it should not be loading modules from a different kernel version than the one you are running.

Bug#808380: mount: unknown filesystem type 'vfat'

On 12/21/2015 12:18 PM, Sven Joachim wrote: > It can't do that if the new kernel has the same ABI as the old one, > since the new module has replaced the old on disk. The existing file is not replaced on disk; a new kernel writes its modules to a new directory named after its new version number.

Bug#808380: mount: unknown filesystem type 'vfat'

On 12/20/2015 3:46 AM, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote: > [87352.726698] fat: Unknown symbol __bread_gfp (err 0) > [87352.726770] fat: Unknown symbol __getblk_gfp (err 0) > > It looks like it is an error in the (v)fat implementation, and not in > mount. Do you have a custom kernel installed? It

Bug#808380: mount: unknown filesystem type 'vfat'

On 12/21/2015 10:58 AM, Sven Joachim wrote: > Yes, but after a kernel upgrade the new modules might not be compatible > with the running kernel, e.g. they might have picked up new symbols. > This seems to be the case here. Yes, but modutils loads the module from the version you are *running*, not

Bug#807323: gparted needs policykit-1 but its neither in depends or recommends

Do you have udisks2 installed? The only connection I can think of from gparted to policykit is through udisks, as the gparted script tries to run udisks-inhibit to stop auto mounting. I'm guessing that is where this bug needs reassigned. On 12/7/2015 7:33 AM, shirish शिरीष wrote: > Package:

Bug#674486: gparted: Gparted doesn't open with sudo.

retitle 674486 X apps don't work under su reassign 674486 login subscribe 674486 ps...@ubuntu.com thanks On 10/11/2015 11:59 PM, Peter Easthope wrote: > Oops, sorry. Yes, the problem is not just with gparted. > > peter@joule:~$ su > Password: > root@joule:/home/peter# xeyes > No protocol

Bug#674486: Re (2): Bug#674486: gparted: Gparted doesn't open with sudo

On 10/7/2015 12:26 AM, Peter Easthope wrote: > As peter in a terminal window in LXDE, I started xeyes. > > As root in a terminal window in LXDE, I attempted to start This is a difference that I am saying is the problem. Try to start xeyes *as root*, just as you did for gparted.

Bug#674486: gparted: Gparted doesn't open with sudo

On 10/5/2015 1:54 PM, Peter Easthope wrote: > On Mon, October 5, 2015 9:28 am, Phil Susi wrote: >> It appears that you do not have your DISPLAY environment variable set, >> so no X11 apps will work. > > peter@joule:~$ echo $DISPLAY > :0 > > LXDE is used routinel

Bug#674486: gparted: Gparted doesn't open with sudo

On 10/5/2015 10:13 AM, Peter Easthope wrote: > > The problem described by Mikko Koho occurs in a jessie system here. > > ii gparted0.19.0-2 i386 GNOME partition editor > > root@joule:/home/peter# gparted > No protocol specified > > (gpartedbin:1835): Gtk-WARNING **: cannot

Bug#674486: Processed: reopen 674486

Is there a reason you reopened this bug? On 10/4/2015 11:09 PM, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > >> reopen 674486 > Bug #674486 {Done: Phillip Susi } [gparted] gparted: > Gparted doesn't open with sudo > Bug reopened >

Bug#798611: util-linux: /sbin/fsck no longer works as non-root

On 9/11/2015 7:46 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: That was my point, but unless you know the correct path to pass I'd say not passing any PATH at all is better the passing an incorrect one. If cryptmount sanitized the environment (if it did not want the user to be in control of the environment) it

Bug#793670: mount: bad optical disk can place mount command into uninteruptable sleep

reassign 793670 linux thanks It is the kernel that decides to use an uninterruptable sleep. On 7/26/2015 7:32 AM, Dallas E. Legan wrote: Package: mount Version: 2.26.2-6 Severity: normal Tags: upstream Dear Maintainer, I've found trying to mount an optical disk that turns out to be bad, (this

Bug#789950: fixed upstream

On 7/1/2015 4:43 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: Control: tags -1 + fixed-upstream There's now an upstream commit titled sulogin: improve support for locked root account https://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/util-linux/util-linux.git/commit/?id=7ff1162e67164cb4ece19dd809c26272461aa254 This should

Bug#789950: util-linux: sulogin does not work if root account is locked

On 6/25/2015 11:59 AM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: I'm currently undecided on how to best approach this. As discussed just now with upstream please consider the usecase of a kiosk setup. Root account is locked. (Physical access restricted.) Suddently the filesystem becomes bad and needs attention.

Bug#788808: parted: incorrectly reads partition table, or crashes

On 6/17/2015 1:24 PM, A Mennucc1 wrote: here is the MBR. You forgot to attach the file. I also have a proposal. When parted opens a disk, it should both check if the whole disk is formatted as a VFAT (or other) volume, and check if there is a partition table of some kind. In case that both

Bug#788808: parted: incorrectly reads partition table, or crashes

On 6/15/2015 5:06 AM, A Mennucc wrote: The partition table of this image file cannot be properly read or modified with parted. Older versions of parted crash on this image file. Newer versions report a the partition table is dangerously different from the real one, so an user that uses parted to

Bug#787763: util-linux: 'unshare -m' broken

On 6/5/2015 9:23 AM, James Long wrote: Hi Andreas, My problem is actually with unshare(2), rather than unshare(1). Is there an equivalent patch for unshare(2)? I don't think you understood the upstream patch. The idea is that after unshare(2), calls to mount(2) have the option causing

Bug#787763: util-linux: 'unshare -m' broken

On 6/5/2015 11:00 AM, James Long wrote: So the mount is still visible to other processes, and doesn't exit with the process, as it used to in wheezy. The same thing happens with --make-private. What am I doing wrong? I believe you need to --make-private first, *then* mount the fs. The

Bug#737658: some notes on util-linux takeover of eject

On 6/1/2015 12:28 PM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: The eject utility from util-linux will also bring a dependency on libmount, which currently has no udeb. This needs to be added as well. Should hopefully not be an issue... (famous last words?) Wait, how can this be? Certainly the mount

Bug#737658: some notes on util-linux takeover of eject

On 6/1/2015 1:49 PM, Andreas Henriksson wrote: First of all the mount program is not shipped in (binary package) util-linux, but in the package called mount (on linux-any). (This is mostly a historic heritage I guess.) Ok, but it's still packaged in some udeb that is part of d-i right? And

Bug#785138: gparted: Upstream has a new version, v0.22

On 5/12/2015 12:17 PM, felipe wrote: Package: gparted Version: 0.19.0-2.1 Severity: wishlist Dear Maintainer, Gparted has a new version upstream (v0.22) which supports GPT partition tables. gparted has had support for GPT for ages, but yea, I suppose now that jessie has been released I can