On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 7:38 PM tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:

>
> > On 20-08-2016, at 3:46 AM, Fabio Niephaus <lists at fniephaus.com> wrote:
> >
>
> > May I suggest we simply skip the ensure_conf_file step, if the launch
> script detects to run on a Pi for this release? Shall we print instructions
> for the common-session setup if necessary instead? We can adjust this
> behavior in the future, of course. But I'm not sure we can work out a
> proper solution in the next couple of days.
>
> I would suggest that you make the ensure_conf_file script start with a
> test for
>
> a) being on a Pi with a kernel level 4 or greater
> b) being on any machine with kernel greater than X, where X is not
> currently a number I know. I simply don’t know enough linux terminology to
> do effective googling for this. The Pi does not have a special kernel so I
> think any version 4+ would be safe. Is anyone running on an x86 linux out
> there?
>
> If NOT (a AND b) then do magic with /etc/securityblah-blah.
>
> Somebody that follows and understand linux release history would probably
> be able to tell us exactly which version introduced the fix that makes
> /etc/security/blah unnecessary.
>

I just had a quick chat with Eliot and we decided to skip the
ensure_conf_file step on systems with Linux kernels earlier than 4.x.x for
now.
We can change the behavior in the next release, but I'd currently say, it
works well on the different systems as is.

Best,
Fabio


> A test for /etc/pam.d/common-session containing
> '       session    required   pam_limits.so'
> would be a decent idea if we could also work out if the user were using
> xrdp or any other affected system. I’d suggest just documenting it for now.
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Strange OpCodes: BFM: Branch on Full Moon
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20160823/e12b1b36/attachment.htm