Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

On 2012-03-23 04:07, Ian Jackson wrote: > If you absolutely want a workaround an obvious one is to bodge a fake > deluser into the piuparts setup. I don't think working around bugs without properly documenting them first ist a good solution. Especially for sid where we do much more ped

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

Andreas Beckmann writes ("Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts"): > Better suggestions welcome. I'd like to give advice how to fix the buggy > postrm scripts *now* while being aware that general changes in user

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

Andreas Beckmann writes ("Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts"): > I have revised the template to include a link to the discussion about > not removing system users on package removal: I think it would be better to w

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

On 2012-03-22 13:50, Ian Jackson wrote: > Andreas Beckmann writes ("Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command > not found' errors detected by piuparts"): >> I have revised the template to include a link to the discussion about >> not removing system

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

On 2012-02-04 08:55, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du jeudi 02 février 2012, vers > Andreas Beckmann disait : > >> I'm planning to file bugs against all packages that currently fail the >> piuparts test with a 'deluser/d

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

OoO Peu avant le début de l'après-midi du jeudi 02 février 2012, vers 13:11, Andreas Beckmann disait : > I'm planning to file bugs against all packages that currently fail the > piuparts test with a 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' error in > wheezy a

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

Lars Wirzenius wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 05:09:42PM +, PICCA Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote: > > In that case you got his kind of piuparts error [1], if you did not > > remove the homedir of the previously added user. > > > > What is the right fice for this ? > > The proper way to fix this is

Re: RE : mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 05:09:42PM +, PICCA Frédéric-Emmanuel wrote: > > We had a conversation (here I think) last year about whether programs > > should be trying to automatically remove users in their postrm. IIRC > > the conclusion of that discussion the answer was that they should not, > >

RE : mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

> We had a conversation (here I think) last year about whether programs > should be trying to automatically remove users in their postrm. IIRC > the conclusion of that discussion the answer was that they should not, > at least in the default case. > We should double check this, before you submit

Re: mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

Andreas Beckmann writes ("mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts"): > Most of these errors happen during the 'postrm purge' phase because > non-essential programs are called by the maintainer script without &

mass bug filing of 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' errors detected by piuparts

Hi, I'm planning to file bugs against all packages that currently fail the piuparts test with a 'deluser/delgroup: command not found' error in wheezy and sid. Currently 17 binary packages from 15 source packages are affected. Most of these errors happen during the 'postrm

Re: adduser/deluser on postinst

On 11/08/2007 Marc Haber wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >For some code examples which do work (and are used in several > >packages) see: > > > >http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/ch9.en.html#s-bpp-lower-privs > > Why does this HOWTO suggest replicating code that is alre

Re: adduser/deluser on postinst

On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 23:57:23 +0200, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I think that we should standarise user creation/deletion in maintainer >scripts. Yes. The tool for doing so is adduser. >For some code examples which do work (and are used in several >packages) see: > >h

Re: adduser/deluser on postinst

On Tue, Aug 07, 2007, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: > I think that we should standarise user creation/deletion in maintainer > scripts. True; some notes on: -- Loïc Minier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] wi

Re: adduser/deluser on postinst

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 07:39:58AM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > What do you think ? I think that we should standarise user creation/deletion in maintainer scripts. For some code examples which do work (and are used in several packages) see: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howt

Re: adduser/deluser on postinst

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007, Vincent Bernat wrote: > gdm Fixed in SVN; thanks. -- Loïc Minier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

adduser/deluser on postinst

system user (so the user can be unrelated to the package). Because of this, some package (ntp) just skip the test and use adduser with --quiet. On deletion, some package do not use --system option of deluser, so delete a legit non-system user without warning. On my system, there

Re: removing problemes with deluser

n or if you Marc> had refrained from trying to remove a default account. Don't forgot the case where package maintainer scripts call "deluser" automatically... It is my opinion that postrm maintainer scripts should not use the delete home directory option, because of the possibi

Re: removing problemes with deluser

On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:47:44 +0100, Klaus Ethgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >But this is not the point of my message. I think long bevore if I should >write the Mail you told me to do. I whanted to know about the severity >as wishlist for such a grave bug (or tell it problem) is not adequate I >thin

Re: removing problemes with deluser

default in the deluser source code. In the default > | configuration, deluser will not zap any important system directories > | any more. Thanks to Ernst Kloppenburg and Klaus Ethgen. (mh) > | Closes: #293559, #271829 > > You should have received this in a "fixed-in-e

Re: removing problemes with deluser

he experimental distribution. Excerpt from the changelog: | * Add a new config option NO_DEL_PATHS to deluser.conf with a | sensible default in the deluser source code. In the default | configuration, deluser will not zap any important system directories | any more. Thanks to Ernst Kloppe

removing problemes with deluser

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, I found a bug with adduser package that deluser will remove system directories like /bin (or like / as other user found). This will happen if the homedirectory is /bin of some system accounts which should be removed and the option REMOVE_HOME

Re: LDAP adduser/deluser

On Tue, 27 May 2003, Zed Pobre wrote: > > > > Could you elaborate on what ways yours works better than the original > > > > adduser? I'm sure Roland would love to hear about functionality > > > > improvements, and I'd certainly be keen for any improvements to the > > > > LDAP-specific code... > >

Re: LDAP adduser/deluser

On Tue, 27 May 2003, Zed Pobre wrote: > > Could you elaborate on what ways yours works better than the original > > adduser? I'm sure Roland would love to hear about functionality > > improvements, and I'd certainly be keen for any improvements to the > > LDAP-specific code... > > My version

Re: LDAP adduser/deluser

On Mon, 26 May 2003, Zed Pobre wrote: > I have written code (in Perl) that replicates much of the behaviour of > adduser and deluser (down to command-line switch compatibility), but > modifies user information in a LDAP database instead of flat files > like /etc/passwd. Erm, did yo

deluser

I've started writing the deluser script I mentioned a while back. As one would expect, it has a configuration file which can control precisely what it does. At the moment I intend that the configuration file be, in fact, a piece of Perl which is executed by the script as it runs - this i