On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 06:43:56PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 12:18:42PM -0400, Jason Franklin wrote:
> > Marc, do you think this is reasonable?
>
> I am still not a fan. That additional language needs to be maintained,
> translated, proofread, and dis
effect.
This is a minimal change that at least makes note of something that may
be surprising to a person who has limited familiarity with how Debian
works.
Would this type of change help?
Marc, do you think this is reasonable?
--
Jason Franklin
On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 09:54:54AM -0400, Jason Franklin wrote:
> > At some point I have somehow found out that using some other magic in
> > addition is necessary. Other users of adduser might not know and just think
> > that `adduser user group` doesn't work or is broken
id any confusion, I've found, is just to tell the user to
"fully logout and log back in" and then go about their business.
I don't think the adduser man page should make mention of newgrp. We
don't own that tool (the "login" package does).
Best,
--
Jason Franklin
y configured or that I am misinterpreting things.
Many thanks,
--
Jason Franklin
res, however.
Hmmm... Maybe someone else will provide a better-informed opinion.
Best,
--
Jason Franklin
move things along.
Thanks to Peter, Andreas, and Bastian for being persistent. :)
--
Jason Franklin
request shortly. :)
Best,
--
Jason Franklin
;m done with the other bug I'm working on, I'll move to this
one and proceed with the stateless implementation.
Saving and restoring a user's shell can be added later if needed.
Sound good?
--
Jason Franklin
he implementation of --homeless and just
proceed with updating the documentation for the --no-create-home option.
Sound good?
--
Jason Franklin
Package: adduser
Version: 3.124
Severity: minor
Greetings:
This is a minor change, but it does remove a library function that
previously had some purpose.
Let me know if this causes problems.
Thanks!
--
Jason Franklin
ects here that the tests handle that aren't handled by doing this
interactively first.
In principle, I think that picking a set of canonical usernames to work
with in tests should be fine. Picking fixed ID numbers is probably not
fine.
--
Jason Franklin
ing step.
> I'd like to claim that feature and work on it if you're ok with that.
> I'm going to create a branch deluser-lock and push frequently, so you
> can review what I am doing. I reserve the right to force-push that
> branch though.
Proceed, of course!
Slowness on my part shouldn't hold things up! ;)
Best,
--
Jason Franklin
to answer this one.
Like I say above, adding only the "--lock" option to deluser minimally
satisfies this new requirement.
I would say it's up to you! :)
--
Jason Franklin
On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 06:01:11PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 10:11:48AM -0400, Jason Franklin wrote:
> > Personally, I think we should simply install a default adduser.conf file
> > and remove all of the debconf stuff from the post install script.
>
&
up a patch to do this, but I don't want to just
blow away debconf settings that people rely upon.
--
Jason Franklin
Greetings:
I plan to start work on this issue in the next few days.
Let me know if this conflicts with anyone's plans!
Best,
--
Jason
useradd uses its own file. I
suppose it's on the user to know which file configures which tool.
Other than having adduser pass through its own settings to avoid
"useradd" warnings, I'm not sure what else can be done to reconcile this
divergence. It has existed for a while.
Let me know if you have any thoughts! Thanks!
--
Jason Franklin
e issue, but
more needs to be done to ensure that other functionality is not altered
unintentionally.
To those interested, a fix for this is pending review and will be
included in the next upload.
--
Jason Franklin
kage maintainer.
It would be a ton of work. That's for sure.
--
Jason Franklin
I am unsure how to proceed, but I know it will require working well with
the shadow maintainers.
I think I'll start a discussion through the proper channel.
Thanks!
--
Jason Franklin
On Sun, 2022-02-13 at 19:18 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 12:27:26PM -0500, Jason Franklin wrote:
> > That warning is not emitted here when "-r" is added to the call made
> > from within adduser. The range discrepancy needs to be sorted out wit
useradd invocation.
However, having such a setting in two places may be a bit confusing.
That warning is not emitted here when "-r" is added to the call made
from within adduser. The range discrepancy needs to be sorted out with
discussion, I think.
--
Jason Franklin
stem/tuptime.service.
> Processing triggers for man-db (2.10.0-2) ...
>
>* What outcome did you expect instead?
> Install the package without "useradd warning" prompt.
Ricardo:
I also came across this warning when investigating this bug.
When I get this bug fixed, the
th this. Rushing is never good.
We will take our time and do this right. :)
It looks like Johannes will be able to work around this on his end for
now. I will put together a PR with tests in the near future to get this
fixed the right way.
--
Jason Franklin
ce this fix into the code with proper review and
tests and what not.
Thanks!
--
Jason Franklin
ix to master. Then, the new package with this fix
could be built off of the feature branch before the merge (the hotfix
branch). We can then merge with master (resolving conflicts) to
integrate with the changes we don't want to release yet.
Does this all sound reasonable?
--
Jason Franklin
patch could be removed in the not-to-far future, as
I am committed to helping with supporting adduser and with fixing bugs
new and old, including this one. :)
Looking forward to hearing what Marc and others think on this one.
Thanks!
-- Jason Franklin
nly be worried about whether a group is empty or not
when deleting a group. Otherwise, it is on the sysadmin to check for
empty groups if they are not desired.
Is my reasoning sound here?
If so, I'll work on this one after I finish the bug I'm working on
currently. It should be an easy win!
--
Jason Franklin
for other contributors to add tests when they provide patches.
That's all for now. Let me know what you think!
--
Jason Franklin
ately might not be added.
I am still new to classifying bugs, so feel free to overwrite my changes
if they seem improper! That will help me learn if I get it wrong.
Thanks to Marc and everyone else for clarifying things!
--
Jason Franklin
whatever is appropriate and close this bug.
This is an interesting idea. It would at least provide a distinction
for the intended result and it would guide people toward complying with
Debian Policy in the case that a user is not supposed to have a home
directory.
--
Jason Franklin
>
> If a user should have a nonexistent home directory, --home /nonexistent
> should be passed to adduser.
I follow you. This is an important distinction.
I suppose a note in the documentation could clarify things for users who
may not be aware of these other usage scenarios.
Thanks!
--
Jason Franklin
of data residing on file systems of these types.
I will mark this bug as confirmed so that it can be handled in a future
release.
Thanks again!
--
Jason Franklin
st
user 'nobody': directory '/nonexistent' does not exist
pwck: no changes
The patch has already been accepted upstream. See the link below to the
GitHub pull request for more discussion...
https://github.com/shadow-maint/shadow/pull/251
The patch follows here:
---
n any way
I can. Please advise on a course of action.
Best wishes,
Jason Franklin
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.0
APT prefers stable
APT policy: (500, 'stable'), (100, 'unstable'), (10, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 4.
36 matches
Mail list logo
