On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 20:40, Patrick Matthäi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sandro Tosi schrieb:
>> Hello Patrick,
>> all your conversation went unnoticed to be due to use of -quite and
>> -submitter, so only now I see your patch.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 20:04, Patrick Matthäi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> I have noexec on /tmp and /var/tmp, but AFAIK that is not suposed to
>>>> break anything policy-wise.
>>
>> mh, even if I still don't understand how --oknodo fix the problem, I
>> may think to add it.
>>
>>> noexec breaks for example debconf in some situations.
>>
>> So, aren't we working around a problem on the user system? I think
>> many uses noexec on some partitions, so that's weird what's happening
>> only on the user's system and not on all the other box.
>
> That is in my eyes the problem, you and myself can not reproduce this
> bug, but it fixed this behaviour on the reporters system.
> Anyway if he just has {/var}/tmp mounted noexec it would not break the
> startup.:) Yeah, so I'd like to see the "set -x" execution from the user, to see where the script fails. Kindly, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, Morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
