useradd problem(!)
Hello When I first installed Debian GNU/Linux on this machine, I reconfigured it so that there is a central user-group called users which all users of this system belong to. I have now reconfigured it back to the default: /etc/adduser.conf [...] USERGROUPS=yes [...] When running useradd, though, I get the following: # useradd -m test # ls -l /home [...] drwxr-sr-x 18 svn users1024 Jan 4 23:28 svn drwxr-xr-x2 test users1024 Jan 4 23:30 test There. The new user 'test' still belongs to 'users' and doesn't get a new group called 'test'. I was curious, so I ran strace over adduser: [first deleted 'test' again] # strace useradd -m test [...] open(/etc/default/useradd, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) [...] access(/home/test, F_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) mkdir(/home/test, 0) = 0 [...] chown(/home/test, 1001, 100) = 0 -- why GID 100? [...] (sorry for the long lines) First, why is useradd looking for a file at /etc/default/useradd? Is this an old location or what? I have only the following there: total 8 -rw-r--r--1 root root 92 Aug 18 23:32 devpts -rwxr--r--1 root root 641 Aug 18 23:33 rcS Second, and this is my main problem, why is the GID 100? I have explicitly configured USERGROUPS=yes in /etc/adduser.conf! I run an up-to-date woody/testing here. Help greatly appreciated, Sven -- Powered by Debian GNU/Linux
Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 07:02:47PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: i would recommend the use of either testing or unstable or stable depending upon the particular requirements of the situation. stable is good when you don't need or want any change at all. testing is good when you want/need to be mostly up-to-date with the latest versions but don't have the time to deal with packaging errors. unstable is good when you want/need to be up-to-date and have both the time and the skill to deal with any problems that may arise. Sure. however that won't be much use if nobody uses 'unstable' as unstable packages won't get installed and tested, so bug reports won't be filed, so unstable packages will move into testing without actually having been tested by anyone. Quite true. Developers should at least be running unstable... Sven BTW: why is your Mail-Follow-Up-To broken? It should point to the list only. Use 'subscribe LIST' if you're using mutt. My mutt intended to CC: you...
Re: useradd problem(!)
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 05:44:04PM +, Malcolm Parsons wrote: useradd and adduser are two different programs from two different pacakges, the configuration of one does not affect the other: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/useradd passwd: /usr/sbin/useradd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -S /usr/sbin/adduser adduser: /usr/sbin/adduser Yes, quite true. I got them mixed up. All my fault. :) Cheers, Sven
Re: bugs + rant + constructive criticism (long)
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 05:23:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: the new 'testing' distribution (sid) should be even better - nearly all the benefits of 'unstable' but tested to at least install properly without error. Wrong: unstable-sid; testing-woody. sid/unstable will never become 'testing' or 'frozen' or even 'stable'. Personally, I would recommend the use of 'testing' in a production environment, but not unstable. One doesn't always have the time to fix problems related to the distribution itself whilst working in a production environment. Sven -- # debian/rules
Re: 'testing' dep conflicts
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:44:55PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote: On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 12:10:41AM +0100, Sven Burgener wrote: 1. Why are packages kept back like follows? [ snip ] First, since you're upgrading from potato to woody (you've changed distributions), you should use `apt-get dist-upgrade'. [ snip ] No, now that I look at it the problem is that libc6 is being held back. Try the dist-upgrade method instead. Righto. Thanks. Yes, that did it. Sven -- L I N U X .~. The Choice /V\ of a GNU /( )\ Generation ^^-^^
'testing' dep conflicts
Hello I am running 'testing', upgraded from potato a few days ago. Two questions: 1. Why are packages kept back like follows? $ apt-get update apt-get upgrade Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/main Packages Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/main Release Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/contrib Packages Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/contrib Release Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/non-free Packages Hit http://security.debian.org potato/updates/non-free Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/main Packages Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/main Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/contrib Packages Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/contrib Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/non-free Packages Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/non-free Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/main Sources Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/main Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/contrib Sources Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/contrib Release Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/non-free Sources Hit http://non-us.debian.org testing/non-US/non-free Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/main Packages Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/main Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/contrib Packages Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/contrib Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/non-free Packages Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/non-free Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/main Sources Ign http://http.us.debian.org testing/main Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/contrib Sources Ign http://http.us.debian.org testing/contrib Release Hit http://http.us.debian.org testing/non-free Sources Ign http://http.us.debian.org testing/non-free Release Reading Package Lists... Building Dependency Tree... Reading Package Lists... Building Dependency Tree... The following packages have been kept back base-passwd bin86 bsdgames bsdutils cpp cron e2fsprogs ed fetchmail fileutils findutils ftp g++ gcc libc6 libc6-dev libreadline4 libstdc++2.10-dev locales login mount ntop passwd patch pciutils setserial telnet traceroute util-linux wget The following packages will be upgraded debianutils dialog gettext-base gnupg groff info libnewt0 libstdc++2.10 procmail whiptail 10 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 30 not upgraded. Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies: debianutils: PreDepends: libc6 (= 2.1.97) but 2.1.3-13 is to be installed E: Internal Error, InstallPackages was called with broken packages! 2. Why is it that the above dependency conflict arouse? How can I fix this? Cheers Sven -- Windows is great - I used it to download Linux
