UVF Exception: libpam-ldap 178-1ubuntu2 -> 180-1

Bug #40149 reported by Jo Shields on 2006-04-19
14
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
debian-installer (Ubuntu)
Medium
Unassigned
libpam-ldap (Ubuntu)
Medium
Colin Watson

Bug Description

Further to bug 40003, I feel this warrants urgent fixing before Dapper is released - it is completely illogical to provide a package for system authentication via LDAP which then misses out a file vitally required to use any of the useful features LDAP-based authentication provides.

If updating the upstream version is unacceptable, then as a bare minimum the following line should be appended to debian/libpam-ldap.install:
ldapns.schema usr/share/doc/libpam-ldap

Full changelog at http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/libp/libpam-ldap/libpam-ldap_180-1/changelog#versionversion180-1

changes from current Dapper package to Etch package

Summary of changes in diff

Full changelog for new upstream version

pbuilder log

Changed in libpam-ldap:
assignee: nobody → motu-uvf
Daniel Holbach (dholbach) wrote :

Could you add the changes in the upstream changelog as well?

Changed in libpam-ldap:
status: Unconfirmed → Needs Info

Changes can be summed up as 2 manpage fixes, a bug fix, and a security fix.

Daniel Holbach (dholbach) wrote :

could you make sure you ran diff -ruN <somedir> <someotherdir> | diffstat ? to me it looks like you ommitted the '-r' flag (to check all directories for changes).

Reinhard Tartler (siretart) wrote :

well, libpam-ldap is a very sensitive package, and we should update it with care, since it is critical in many installations. From the changelog, I agree that we should get the new update, but I'd like to inspect the complete debdiff of the source package first. will do that tomorrow.

Whoopsie, you're right Daniel. Here's a proper diffstat

Matt Zimmerman (mdz) wrote :

This has nothing to do with debian-installer as far as I can see

Changed in debian-installer:
status: Unconfirmed → Rejected
Tollef Fog Heen (tfheen) wrote :

From reading the diff, I can't see anything wrong with going for an UVF.

We should probably consider getting libpam-ldap in main too, since it's not that uncommon to use for networks.

Sebastian Dröge (slomo) wrote :

seems to be fine for me judging from the changelog and diffstat... what do you think, Daniel/Reinhard?

Changed in libpam-ldap:
status: Needs Info → Unconfirmed
Daniel Holbach (dholbach) wrote :

Yeah, looks good.

Reinhard Tartler (siretart) wrote :

I testbuild and piuparted it locally here, so I'm okay with this upgrade as well.

Sebastian Dröge (slomo) wrote :

Ok... so let's get this synced from debian :)

Changed in libpam-ldap:
status: Unconfirmed → Confirmed
Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

Synced libpam-ldap 180-1.

Changed in libpam-ldap:
assignee: motu-uvf → kamion
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers