[arch-dev-public] openssh 5.3p1-4: sshd script kills all sshd processes??
What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good: http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/?op=comp&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@59462&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@60182 Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server.
On 10/03/10 09:03, Thomas Bächler wrote:
What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good: http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/?op=comp&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@59462&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@60182
Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server.
That looks like it was committed in response to this bug: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17138
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 10/03/10 09:03, Thomas Bächler wrote:
What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good:
Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server.
That looks like it was committed in response to this bug: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17138
Yeah this happened to me, I didn't think twice about it thinking I did something wrong but realized now that I have never been booted before. Good thing I have a remote terminal. Did this go through [testing]? Just wondering if we could/should have caught this earlier; maybe we need certain things done with certain packages to certify their OK-ness. Especially with sshd, a remote restart is almost always a good check that covers a lot of bases. -Dan
On 10/03/10 09:27, Dan McGee wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Allan McRae<allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 10/03/10 09:03, Thomas Bächler wrote:
What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good:
Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server.
That looks like it was committed in response to this bug: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17138
Yeah this happened to me, I didn't think twice about it thinking I did something wrong but realized now that I have never been booted before. Good thing I have a remote terminal.
Did this go through [testing]?
Definitely. And got more than enough signoffs...
Just wondering if we could/should have caught this earlier; maybe we need certain things done with certain packages to certify their OK-ness. Especially with sshd, a remote restart is almost always a good check that covers a lot of bases.
This has sort of been bought up before. More in the context of not needing to test every possible combination of bug fixes (instead just a basic usage test) to signoff lesser used packages. So this would suggest the opposite for some packages. That is getting a complicated signoff policy. As an aside, it took 11 days for this bug to be noticed. So considering a package "bug free" after a week and giving autosignoffs has issues. Allan
On 10/03/10 09:03, Thomas Bächler wrote:
What did whoever commited this smoke? It must have been very good: http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/?op=comp&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@59462&compare[]=%2Fopenssh%2Ftrunk@60182
Whenever you want to do /etc/rc.d/sshd restart remotely, it will kill your ssh session. It is an important feature of openssh that all ssh connections stay OPEN even if you kill the master server. With this change, you will get kicked and goodbye remote server.
I suppose the most important thing here is: who is doing the fix?
Am Mittwoch, 10. März 2010 00:38:04 schrieb Allan McRae:
I suppose the most important thing here is: who is doing the fix?
As I suggest Aaron is busy I'll put a new version in testing. It's interesting why this change was committed anyway but we should provide a working version first. -- Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:34 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 10. März 2010 00:38:04 schrieb Allan McRae:
I suppose the most important thing here is: who is doing the fix?
As I suggest Aaron is busy I'll put a new version in testing. It's interesting why this change was committed anyway but we should provide a working version first.
I did not test it with a standing connection, so I never caught this. Additionally, I only committed it to trunk. Is it possible to do a "svn log" between branches? That is, something like to "svn log openssh/repos/core-i686 openssh/trunk" ? It might be a good idea to get a dump of the commits from the last release as part of the signoff email, so that things like this don't slip through the cracks (trunk commits without a release)
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee
-
Pierre Schmitz
-
Thomas Bächler