Hi Michael, On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 05:37:55PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 01.07.2014 17:20, schrieb Thomas Weber: > > Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is > > done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the > > future? > Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim. > The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is > installed. Ok, but assuming that is the fix (install systemd-sysv or systemd-shim), how did bug #7533357 happen? Notwithstanding Juliusz's desire to not have systemd installed (which I don't expect us to address), if both of those packages were missing from the system, then something is buggy. Juliusz, can you please paste your apt logs showing what pulled systemd in on the system? If something is depending on systemd directly without either systemd-sysv or systemd-shim, that something is buggy. If systemd-sysv *was* installed and logind wasn't working, this probably points to the bug with logind being broken before reboot to systemd. However, acpi-support-base also needs to make sure that logind is functional before delegating control of the power button to it. And for that, I see that acpi-support 0.141-4 introduced a change in unstable *yesterday* to deal with exactly this problem: instead of only checking for a running logind, acpi-support-base now checks the systemd dbus interface to verify that logind is running and usable. So it's possible that Juliusz's issue is a duplicate of bug #752781. On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 07:19:26PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 01.07.2014 18:53, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek: > > Michael closed it straight away, > > without investigating the issue. > Oh, I did. That's why I told you to install systemd-shim. It should not be the user's responsibility to install this package manually to get back to a working system. On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 06:51:22PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim. > > The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is > > installed. > The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any > bug filed against it. Well, I think the behavior of acpi-support-base is *now* correct in unstable, in response to bug #752781. I don't think it's correct in testing. -- 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/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature