Hi, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote (19 Jan 2014 15:11:58 GMT) : > Thanks. What am I supposed to do with that? Could you at least provide > some context when reassigning a bug?
Sure. I thought the cloned bug had enough info in it. Sorry. In short, the AppArmor profile shipped by the lightdm package requires an "abstraction" file that is not part of any upstream AppArmor release yet, and is not shipped by the apparmor Debian package. I suspect this profile was taken from Ubuntu, whose apparmor package has cherry-picked the upstream commit that adds this abstraction. What should be done IMO is to patch the buggy AppArmor profile to work on Debian. Commenting out the faulty line ('#include <abstractions/dbus-accessibility>') until Debian's apparmor ships the missing abstraction would be enough. I don't think doing this would have any adverse effect: the dbus-accessibility abstraction only adds a "dbus bus=accessibility" permission, that is useless on anything but a heavily patched kernel + AppArmor userspace currently: the dbus rules are currently only supported on Ubuntu trusty, and getting this support upstream and into Debian will take a while. Don't hesitate asking if you need more info or clarification :) Cheers, -- intrigeri | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc | OTR fingerprint @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr.asc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org