On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 09:10:21AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > >> The plain fact:
> >> Using systemd breaks something that worked for probably a decade or longer > >> before however long that su is in that init script. So on what account do > >> you call calling "su" in an init script a bug? It may not be the most > >> elegant solution to do things, granted, but a bug? Come on. Calling it a > >> bug just cause systemd / policykit treat calling su in an initscript as > >> they do is quite arrogant in my eyes. > >As the maintainer of the pam package in Debian, I assure you: this is a bug > >in dirmngr. System services should not (must not) call interfaces that > >launch pam sessions as part of their init scripts. su is one of those > >interfaces. > Is this documented anywhere, or is this only clear with detailed PAM > knowledge, which I have tried to build numerous times in the last ten > years and was never able due to (in my opinion) inadequate > documentation on the beginner level. It's not documented anywhere; it's an emergent property which is obvious if you understand the underlying design, but not something that was ever designed per se. It might not be a bad idea to document it, though I'm not sure where the best place to do this would be. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
