Hi, Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> (2020-01-29): > On Wed, 2020-01-29 at 19:24 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > > systemd (241-7~deb10u3) buster; urgency=medium > > > > * core: set fs.file-max sysctl to LONG_MAX rather than ULONG_MAX. > > Since kernel 5.2 (but also stable kernels like 4.19.53) the > > kernel thankfully returns proper errors when we write a value out of > > range to the sysctl. Which however breaks writing ULONG_MAX to > > request the maximum value. Hence let's write the new maximum value > > instead, LONG_MAX. (Closes: #945018) > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/commit/673e108907baf1a242c4842ace6e9e3a23b11d52 > > > > Upstream cherry-pick, fixed in unstable/testing. Rather straight- > > forward fix. I wasn't planning doing a stable upload for this issue > > alone but only in combination with other fixes. > > > > * core: change ownership/mode of the execution directories also for > > static users. This ensures that execution directories like > > CacheDirectory and StateDirectory are properly chowned to the user > > specified in User= before launching the service. (Closes: #919231) > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/systemd-team/systemd/commit/e9c8637d06e373430b8986643cfb537a23b0b1fd > > > > This is an upstream cherry-pick from > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/12005 > > I'm a bit undecided whether to cherry-pick all changes from this PR > > (which look like worthwile changes to have) or only commit > > 206e9864de460dd79d9edd7bedb47dee168765e1. > > > > I decided for the latter for now, as it keeps the changes minimal and > > seems to fix the issue at hand. That said, would welcome your > > feedback here. Would you prefer that we pull in the complete upstream > > PR #12005 or keep the changes minimal? > > > > PR #12005 is part of v242, i.e. fixed in unstable/testing. > > I think I'd be OK with either, looking over the changes, so am happy to > leave the choice up to your judgement. If you decide to include all of > the changes, please could you update the diff attached here for > completeness. > > > Those changes don't touch udev, but will need an ack from kibi (which > > I've CCed). Based on the (as always appreciated) detailed analysis, feel free to go ahead, thanks. Cheers, -- Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org) <https://debamax.com/> D-I release manager -- Release team member -- Freelance Consultant
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature