Re: RFC: adding pre-depends to libpam-modules for lenny
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 08:01:37PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Dec 2008 00:57:22 -0600, Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >The issue is that, in order to reliably ensure that a user (such as the
> >admin) is not locked out by xscreensaver or xlockmore in the middle of an
> The release notes strongly suggest not doing the upgrade from within
> an X session, so I'd regard a lock-out due to an X screensaver kicking
> in an admin error.
The information in the release notes is outdated in this regard, gdm doesn't
get restarted on upgrade so there's no particular danger of botching the
upgrade by running apt under gdm. Thanks, I've updated the release notes.
Also, the release notes only say that you shouldn't run the upgrade *from*
such X sessions, this says nothing about leaving X sessions running for
other users during an upgrade. (Though it's implicit that if you're not
using gdm, these users are going to be mad at you when their sessions
Finally, while a stable dist-upgrade is going to include updates to
libpam-modules and the *dm package in the same run, users tracking testing
or unstable could easily find themselves upgrading libpam-modules where they
believed it was safe and hitting this problem in the process. So a general
fix is still needed for future ABI changes.
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/