Not clear if sshd failed to bind to :22.

Bug #806231 reported by Richard G. Clegg on 2011-07-05
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
openssh (Ubuntu)

Bug Description

lsh-server appears to be installed by default on natty. I did not realise this and installed openssh-server. No conflict of packages was reported and both packages were installed but with openssh-server in a poorly configured state unable to get access to port 22. Because I did not know of the existence of lsh-server it took me a long time to diagnose the problem.

Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

lsh-server isn't installed by default. Dave Walker points out that you can have both listening on different ports, so I don't know; it seems arguable that a Conflicts is a bit heavyweight, since it removes that possibility ...

Dave Walker (davewalker) wrote :

Thanks for reporting this bug.

This same issue exists with dropbear aswell. There is a fight to see which sshd binds first to 22. However, I was able to have dropbear, lsh-server and openssh installed concurrently without dpkg configuring failure. The only issue was that it was not clear which sshd had won the fight.

Marking confirmed and importance low.

Changed in openssh (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
importance: Undecided → Low
summary: - Conflicts with lsh-server
+ Not clear if sshd failed to bind to :22.

I beg your pardon, you are absolutely correct that it is not installed by default. (I have no idea how it did get installed since I had a fresh install of the OS and I install everything from command line, I guess it was dragged in as a dependency from some other package).

You are also right that there is a possible use case where both are installed on different ports but this is surely rare.

Could the package give a warning if installed with a rival claimant to port 22?

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers