Re: Y2038-safe replacements for utmp/wtmp and lastlog
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 12:30, Chris Hofstaedtler <zeha@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Fellow Developers,
>
> you are probably aware of the time_t-64bit migration :-)
> However, this does not magically transition all data formats to 64bit
> times. One such instance is the set of utmp/wtmp and lastlog files.
>
> Thorsten Kukuk and others have been working on replacements for the
> existing file formats and interfaces [1]; these are called wtmpdb
> and lastlog2.
>
> Some parties have requested that we do something in Debian [2]. If
> we use Thorsten's work (and why not?), this likely means introducing
> new packages into the Priority: standard set, and changes to a few
> other packages, esp. those that handle user sessions.
>
> Thorsten's code introduces new PAM modules to manage the new files,
> so it should transparently work with most packages. Later, the
> old interfaces can probably be turned off. This seems like a good
> idea as a migration strategy to me.
> A bonus seems to be that installs not wanting these features can
> remove them - whereas today they are baked into everything.
>
>
> On the wiki [0] I have summarized what I know; a list of initial
> work items; and some open questions mostly concerned with upgrading.
>
> I invite you to read the wiki page and the background info, to
> identify gaps, to provide insights on feasability and further
> related comments.
> I'm hoping that we can build consensus on this plan.
>
> Please keep #1068017 in CC: when discussing substantial matters
> about this plan but drop it for only vaguely related sub-threads.
>
> Chris
>
>
> [0] https://wiki.debian.org/pam_lastlog2%20and%20wtmpdb
> [1] https://www.thkukuk.de/blog/Y2038_glibc_lastlog_64bit/
> [2] https://bugs.debian.org/1068017
Would be nice to drop things that are not used, but otherwise, option
A looks good and broadly similar to what other distros are doing, so
should be pretty safe. Thanks for taking care of this.
Reply to: