On Sun, 9 Jun 2024 06:58:24 +0200 Andreas Metzler <ametz...@bebt.de> wrote: > On 2024-05-29 Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 29 May 2024 20:15:36 +0200 Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org > > wrote: > >> On Tue, 28 May 2024 17:15:02 +0100 Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org > > wrote: > >>> On Tue, 28 May 2024 17:44:54 +0200 Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org > >>> wrote: > [...] > > >>>> Please do not not ship conflicting configuration for /run/lock > > >>>> /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/debian.conf:d /run/lock 1777 root root - > > - > >>>> /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/legacy.conf:d /run/lock 0755 root root - > > >>>> triggering unnecessary warnings. > > >>> This is needed to apply debian-specific changes, just ignore it, > >>> it's > >>> harmless > [...] > > No. The current approach is just fine. If you don't like seeing the > > harmless notice-level log, just add a local override in /etc/. > > >> Btw, please don't close bug reports without CCing the bug submitter. > >> That's rude. > > > Please stop playing ping pong with the BTS, this is staying as it is. > > Hello, > > Let me upvote this bug-report. I have unnecessarly spent time > investigating the issue, checking whether this is a known bug. Having > read through the bug I still have not read an explanation why the > current state "is just fine". If it really was systemd would not throw > a warning. What is the huge benefit of shipping conflicting configurations > instead of shipping one that is correct for Debian that justifies > wasting our contributors' time?
It exists due to a silly legacy debianism - namely /run/lock being world writable instead of having sensible permissions. If you don't like the warning, please spend time to move the project away from this ancient and obsolete debianism, and then the override will be dropped. Until then, it will stay exactly as it is. Complaining on this or similar bug reports is not going to achieve anything. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
