Hi,
On 18.09.23 05:16, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
If you follow the argument for /usr to its logical conclusion of being
the complete image, you end up moving state of the image (as opposed to
the system) from /var/lib to /usr as well, for example /var/lib/dpkg and
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 04:05:50PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:53:24PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > With the provision that I know next to nothing about pam - if I
> > understood correctly how it works, why not simply do both? Ship the
> > default file in the
On Sep 16, Steve Langasek wrote:
> While I have applications downstream which also care about empty /etc, the
> current situation is that this wouldn't help because almost all the
> PAM application configs in Debian reference one or more of
>
On Sep 16, Russ Allbery wrote:
> However, and this is very important, *no one has decided that you get to
> do that work in Debian*.
I am confident that I have never said otherwise.
> Right now, any base system package maintainer could decide that putting
> configuration files in /etc makes
Marco d'Itri writes:
> On Sep 15, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I have significant discomfort aligning what you say (pam is the last
>> blocker) with what several people said earlier in the week. What I
>> heard is that there was no project consensus to do this, and that
>> people were running
On Sat, 16 Sept 2023 at 11:20, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:08:06PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >
> >
> > Apropos of the discussion about removing default configuration from
> > /etc.
> > Upstream PAM now supports doing that. You can set up a vendor directory
> > such as
> "Russ" == Russ Allbery writes:
Russ> Sam Hartman writes:
>>> "Peter" == Peter Pentchev writes:
Peter> Hm, what happens if a sysadmin deliberately removed a file
Peter> that the distribution ships in /etc, trying to make sure that
Peter> some specific service
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 02:08:06PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>
> Apropos of the discussion about removing default configuration from
> /etc.
> Upstream PAM now supports doing that. You can set up a vendor directory
> such as /usr/lib where pam.d and security live.
What are other
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 03:17:42PM -0600, Sam Hartman wrote:
> Luca> And we can have a
> Luca> working, bootable Debian container with only /usr.
> I'm not actually convinced this is a good thing.
> (I don't think it's a bad thing--I just am not convinced it's something
> we should be
On Sep 15, Sam Hartman wrote:
> But for the most part PAM appears to just override on a file-by-file
> basis.
Just like udev, kmod, dbus, etc...
PAM is not different.
> I have significant discomfort aligning what you say (pam is the last
> blocker) with what several people said earlier in the
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:53:24PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> With the provision that I know next to nothing about pam - if I
> understood correctly how it works, why not simply do both? Ship the
> default file in the package under both /usr and /etc. Then, you get
> the semantics you want with
Sam Hartman writes:
>> "Peter" == Peter Pentchev writes:
> Peter> Hm, what happens if a sysadmin deliberately removed a file
> Peter> that the distribution ships in /etc, trying to make sure that
> Peter> some specific service could never possibly succeed if it
> Peter>
> "Peter" == Peter Pentchev writes:
Peter> On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:53:24PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 21:08, Sam Hartman wrote:
Peter> Hm, what happens if a sysadmin deliberately removed a file
Peter> that the distribution ships in /etc,
> "Luca" == Luca Boccassi writes:
Luca> With the provision that I know next to nothing about pam - if
Luca> I understood correctly how it works, why not simply do both?
Luca> Ship the default file in the package under both /usr and
Luca> /etc. Then, you get the semantics you
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 09:53:24PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 21:08, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Apropos of the discussion about removing default configuration from
> > /etc.
> > Upstream PAM now supports doing that. You can set up a vendor directory
> > such as
On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 21:08, Sam Hartman wrote:
>
>
>
> Apropos of the discussion about removing default configuration from
> /etc.
> Upstream PAM now supports doing that. You can set up a vendor directory
> such as /usr/lib where pam.d and security live.
>
> I thought about doing that for
Apropos of the discussion about removing default configuration from
/etc.
Upstream PAM now supports doing that. You can set up a vendor directory
such as /usr/lib where pam.d and security live.
I thought about doing that for Debian PAM, and have decided against.
My rationale is that I actually
17 matches
Mail list logo
