unsubscribe On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 7:00 PM Debian Bug Tracking System <[email protected]> wrote: > > Your message dated Tue, 15 Oct 2019 23:56:43 +0200 > with message-id <[email protected]> > and subject line closing > has caused the Debian Bug report #785457, > regarding cloud.debian.org: AMI don't need getty > to be marked as done. > > This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. > If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the > Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. > > (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this > message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system > misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected] > immediately.) > > > -- > 785457: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=785457 > Debian Bug Tracking System > Contact [email protected] with problems > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Ognyan Kulev <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 17:57:22 +0300 > Subject: cloud.debian.org: AMI don't need getty > Package: cloud.debian.org > Severity: wishlist > User: [email protected] > Usertags: image > Usertags: aws > > Hi, > > While fine-tuning the Debian 8.0.0 HVM AMI, I noticed that getty > processes fill up space in the otherwise short default process list, so > I disabled these with: > > systemctl mask getty@tty{1,2,3,4,5,6}.service > systemctl mask serial-getty@{hvc0,ttyS0}.service > systemctl mask getty-static.service > > I don't see any reason for having getty support in AMI. I think these > should be disabled. > > All the best, > Ognyan > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Thomas Lange <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Bcc: > Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 23:56:43 +0200 > Subject: closing > Using the new tools, this does no apply any more. > -- > regards Thomas
-- Martin
