On mar., 2009-10-27 at 09:32 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer
cales...@scientia.net wrote:
Ever thought about integrating PaX [0] per default in Debian?
I'm however not sure how much this actually breaks ;)
Any idea if these patches will
In article 873a59ens7@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
Maybe another check besides inode idendity is better, otherwise it will not
be able to be used afer an upgrade (and before reboot), or?
Not needed. If init has been just upgraded, it has been already
told to init -u
Le Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:07:19PM +, Roger Leigh a écrit :
While most developers are conscientious enough to make sure their
packages build, one does see enough crap packages that IMO this
(minimal) bar should probably be kept.
Hi all,
Why don’t we remove the key of the developers
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Yves-Alexis Perez cor...@debian.org wrote:
On mar., 2009-10-27 at 09:32 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Christoph Anton Mitterer
cales...@scientia.net wrote:
Ever thought about integrating PaX [0] per default in Debian?
I'm however
This one time, at band camp, Rodolphe Quiédeville said:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Rodolphe Quiédeville rodol...@quiedeville.org
* Package name: muninpgplugins
While I'm happy to see some of the out of tree munin plugins getting
shipped, I wonder if it makes sense to have a
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Stephen Gran wrote:
This one time, at band camp, Rodolphe Quiédeville said:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Rodolphe Quiédeville rodol...@quiedeville.org
* Package name: muninpgplugins
While I'm happy to see some of the out of tree munin plugins
Hi,
On Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2009, Stephen Gran wrote:
While I'm happy to see some of the out of tree munin plugins getting
shipped, I wonder if it makes sense to have a larger bundle package,
something like munin-plugins-extra? There are loads of useful out of
tree munin plugins floating
http://digg.com/tech_news/Google_Search_goes_Social_Online_Marketing_Blog
Regards
Ashok Kumar
[Charles Plessy]
Why don’t we remove the key of the developers uploading “crap
packages” from the Debian keyring?
I believe a better approach is to collect stats on who upload packages
which fail to build on all architectures, and add a process to
review/requalify a Debian Developer if this
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 05:41:28PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
In article 87r5sudn0p.fsf...@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
[ $(stat -c %d/%i /sbin/init) = $(stat -Lc %d/%i /proc/1/exe
2/dev/null) ] ; then
# So, init
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 873a59ens7@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
Maybe another check besides inode idendity is better, otherwise it will not
be able to be used afer an upgrade (and before reboot), or?
Not needed. If init has been just
Manoj Srivastava sriva...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, Oct 23 2009, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 87r5sudn0p.fsf...@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
[ $(stat -c %d/%i /sbin/init) = $(stat -Lc %d/%i /proc/1/exe
2/dev/null) ] ; then
# So, init exists, and there is a
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
Le lundi 26 octobre 2009 à 01:17 +0100, Norbert Preining a écrit :
I would suggest on the contrary that HOME *will* be set by all scripts
to a newly created empty directory.
Iâd rather suggest that it will be set to a non-existent directory. If
Greetings,
I am glad to bring this to your knowledge that we are launching a Web Portal
- *www.lawyersclinic.com -* which will provide *Customized Legal
Services*to help the
*General Public* to understand their *Legal Rights. * It will also assist
them to understand the necessary actions to be
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:17:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Not needed. If init has been just upgraded, it has been already
told to init -u itself.
This does not appear to be true for upstart, which it's planned to switch to
on Linux for squeeze.
Well, I guess we
On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The second category is named error and the tags listed can not be
Looks like it's named nowayout.
overridden. Those are tags corresponding to packaging errors serious
enough to mark a package unfit for the archive and should never happen.
Hi,
It's not clear just from the logs, but for example:
1246176855 fetched by yy_y_ja_jp
1246176856 processed from todo
1246176866 fetched by yy_y_ja_jp
1247572419 fetched by yy_y_ja_jp
1256308334 updated text by ipv6waterstar (ii)
1256308472 change-comment-only by 203.141.158.41
1256374546
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:56:16PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Huh, isn't that an FHS violation? /dev/initctl isn't much better, but seems
to be covered by special files; upstart doesn't use either of these
locations, fwiw.
I think the issue came down to the fact that with kFreeBSD, /dev is
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 at 15:06:07 +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
The second category is named error and the tags listed can not be
overridden.
I don't think it's appropriate to make, for instance, dir-or-file-in-var-www
instantly fatal without following the usual mass-bug-filing procedure. If
you'd
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 08:17:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
Not needed. If init has been just upgraded, it has been already
told to init -u itself.
This does not appear to be true for upstart, which it's planned to switch
to
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:14:25AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:55:25AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
uses[2].
How do they work? Do they also change
On 11916 March 1977, Frans Pop wrote:
Looks like it's named nowayout.
Thats just because I didnt copy the very latest version of it over to
ries. Done now.
overridden. Those are tags corresponding to packaging errors serious
enough to mark a package unfit for the archive and should never
On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Now, in this case there is no need to move it, as looking at
http://lintian.debian.org/tags/no-standards-version-field.html shows
that we do not see any of the D-I packages, so I assume lintian is
detecting it properly and we do not need to move
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Simon McVittie wrote:
Some examples of tags I consider reasonable to auto-reject, because they
should be easy to fix (but many of them should be bug reports anyway):
- binary-file-compressed-with-upx
- copyright-lists-upstream-authors-with-dh_make-boilerplate
* Joerg Jaspert jo...@ganneff.de [091027 15:06]:
we are turning on lintian based autorejects within the next few days.
This means that packages failing a defined set of lintian tags will no
longer be accepted into the archive, but get rejected immediately.
This should help to get rid of the
Hi again,
I was working through some RC bugs recently and came across 3 roxen
packages. They have recently been orphaned and roxen4 seems to possibly
have some non-free jar files in it.
I am planning on just removing them (at least roxen4, libroxen-ecms, and
libroxen-form initially) since they
Hi Joerg, ftp people,
2009/10/27 Joerg Jaspert jo...@ganneff.de:
Heyho,
we are turning on lintian based autorejects within the next few days.
This means that packages failing a defined set of lintian tags will no
longer be accepted into the archive, but get rejected immediately.
This should
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:15:39PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
[Charles Plessy]
Why don’t we remove the key of the developers uploading “crap
packages” from the Debian keyring?
I believe a better approach is to collect stats on who upload packages
which fail to build on all
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 06:06:12PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
* Joerg Jaspert jo...@ganneff.de [091027 15:06]:
Those automated rejects will only be done on sourceful uploads to
unstable and experimental.
Are there any plans to extend this on binary-only uploads?
First there needs to be
This one time, at band camp, Holger Levsen said:
Hi,
On Dienstag, 27. Oktober 2009, Stephen Gran wrote:
While I'm happy to see some of the out of tree munin plugins getting
shipped, I wonder if it makes sense to have a larger bundle package,
something like munin-plugins-extra? There are
Hello
i have a question regarding above named DSA. It has been announced on October
23th but still the mirror i am using doesn't have it:
$ apt-cache policy kdelibs
kdelibs:
Installed: 4:3.5.10.dfsg.1-0lenny2
Candidate: 4:3.5.10.dfsg.1-0lenny2
Version table:
*** 4:3.5.10.dfsg.1-0lenny2 0
Hi,
CC'ing debian-i18n since it's certainly a good place to discuss this.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:17:34PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
[..]
I think someone who is not logged in is removing the comments and being
disruptive.
Is there a good way to fight against it?
* Add authentication
Hi,
Thilo Six wrote:
Hello
i have a question regarding above named DSA. It has been announced on
October 23th but still the mirror i am using doesn't have it:
[...]
The DSA said:
- *snip* -
Due to a bug in the archive system, the fix for the stable distribution
(lenny), will be
On tiisdei 27 Oktober 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
we are turning on lintian based autorejects within the next few days.
This means that packages failing a defined set of lintian tags will no
longer be accepted into the archive, but get rejected immediately.
This should help to get rid of the
On 27/10/09 at 14:57 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
I realise this is somewhat deliberate, to give maintainers a strong incentive
to fix their packages. However, it seems disproportionate: we don't enforce
that for RC bugs, even those with severity 'critical', so this is effectively
creating a
Those automated rejects will only be done on sourceful uploads to
unstable and experimental.
Are there any plans to extend this on binary-only uploads?
No. Not much helpful to reject buildd packages.
--
bye, Joerg
Von einem Besucher auf dem LT:
Die 3 Microsoft-Leute auf Ihrem Stand müssen
Joerg Jaspert jo...@debian.org (27/10/2009):
No. Not much helpful to reject buildd packages.
Like the ones totally broken due to “toolchain” issues? The
dbus/debhelper joke comes to mind: The sourceful upload was
OK. Due to bad timing, the autobuilt packages were not.
Mraw,
KiBi.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:14:25AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:55:25AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
uses[2].
How do they work? Do they also change the free-standing compiler or only
the hosted
Kees Cook, le Tue 27 Oct 2009 14:11:43 -0700, a écrit :
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:14:25AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:55:25AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
uses[2].
How do they work? Do
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 01:30:12PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 26 Oct 2009, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:14:25AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 11:55:25AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 09:32 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
Any idea if these patches will be merged upstream?
It's probably quite unlikely,... although I never understood why,..
Even though it's available for some architectures,.. it would improve
security at least on them.
Cheers,
--
To
On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 15:48 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelPatchAcceptanceGuidelines
http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-source.html#s-acceptance
The thing is,..
A patch like PaX would (IMHO) improve security a lot,... and it would be
worth thinking for a
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
Also, lots of packages currently in our archive already have those
errors. What do you plan to do with those? If you auto-reject packages
that introduce those errors, it would be logical to file RC bugs and/or
remove them from the archive.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 09:41:59PM +0100, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
Ever thought about integrating PaX [0] per default in Debian?
What features does the grsecurity patch provide currently? I know that
several of the mentioned PaX features are supported in vanilla kernel in
the meantime:
-
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 09:15:58PM +0100, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
On tiisdei 27 Oktober 2009, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
we are turning on lintian based autorejects within the next few days.
This means that packages failing a defined set of lintian tags will no
longer be accepted into the archive,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:59:52PM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
I completely disagree with this lintian warning and prefer to use
Author(s).
I do agree that rejecting on this is probably excessive but I'm curious
as to why you think it's incorrect?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
On 27/10/09 at 14:57 +, Simon McVittie wrote:
Also, lots of packages currently in our archive already have those
errors. What do you plan to do with those? If you auto-reject packages
that introduce those errors, it would be logical to file RC bugs and/or
remove
In article 8763a0fq30@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
About time we took a stand against junk packages.
Not helpfull to attack people. You will just lose a lot developers when they
feel second class.
Gruss
Bernd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
This one time, at band camp, Cyril Brulebois said:
Joerg Jaspert jo...@debian.org (27/10/2009):
No. Not much helpful to reject buildd packages.
Like the ones totally broken due to “toolchain” issues? The
dbus/debhelper joke comes to mind: The sourceful upload was
OK. Due to bad timing, the
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Kees Cook wrote:
It seems the kernel will not be happy if the stack protector is switched
on unconditionally:
http://osdir.com/ml/linux-kernel/2009-10/msg07064.html
Indeed. The kernel build system needs to be able to command whether
stackprotect is enabled
Bernd Eckenfels bernd...@eckenfels.net writes:
In article 8763a0fq30@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
About time we took a stand against junk packages.
Not helpfull to attack people. You will just lose a lot developers
when they feel second class.
Non sequitur.
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:19:22PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009, Kees Cook wrote:
It seems the kernel will not be happy if the stack protector is switched
on unconditionally:
http://osdir.com/ml/linux-kernel/2009-10/msg07064.html
Stephen Gran sg...@debian.org (28/10/2009):
What that has to do with lintian based auto-rejects, I'm not really
sure, but thanks.
Files were installed in binary packages (built on autobuilders with
the brand new toolchain packages) within unusual locations (resulting
in quite broken packages),
2009/10/27 Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:15:39PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
I believe a better approach is to collect stats on who upload packages
which fail to build on all architectures, and add a process to
[...]
Well you can kick out the kernel
On Tue, Oct 27 2009, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
In article 8763a0fq30@anzu.internal.golden-gryphon.com you wrote:
About time we took a stand against junk packages.
Not helpfull to attack people. You will just lose a lot developers
when they feel second class.
Packages are
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:03:06PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:59:52PM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
I completely disagree with this lintian warning and prefer to use
Author(s).
I do agree that rejecting on this is probably excessive but I'm curious
as to why you
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 01:34:11AM +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Stephen Gran sg...@debian.org (28/10/2009):
What that has to do with lintian based auto-rejects, I'm not really
sure, but thanks.
Files were installed in binary packages (built on autobuilders with
the brand new toolchain
[Mail-Followup-To: debian-devel-annou...@lists.debian.org -- nice]
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:06:07PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Heyho,
we are turning on lintian based autorejects within the next few days.
This means that packages failing a defined set of lintian tags will no
longer be
Hi, with the current version of texi2html (1.82-1), I'm getting lots of build
failures like (from diffutils-doc):
...
debian/rules build
/usr/bin/make
make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/diffutils-doc-2.8.1'
makeinfo --output=diff.info diff.texi
texi2html -split_chapter diff.texi
make[1]:
(On vacation with intermittant access, so may not see responses for a
while.)
Ryan Niebur r...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:03:06PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 03:59:52PM -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote:
I completely disagree with this lintian warning and prefer
(On vacation with intermittant access, so it may be a while before I see
responses.)
Ryan Niebur r...@debian.org writes:
this is probably a question more for lintian maintainers, but... what
should we do if lintian is buggy and falsely claims our package has
one of these tags?
The same as
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 02:57:35PM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
- statically-linked-binary
This is not always a bug. e.g. dar-static is supposed to be statically linked!
My packages produce a number of lintian errors/warnings that I don't consider
to be a problem (like this one) - it would
Le Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 07:35:04PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava a écrit :
Can we identify people who might feel like second class citizens
when an effort is made to improve bad packages? I am pretty sure
Debian would be improved.
I think that some of these checks are ‘bikeshedding’ my
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 09:25:05 +0100
Source: new
Binary: new
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Frank Lichtenheld dj...@debian.org
Changed-By: Frank Lichtenheld dj...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:33:45 +0200
Source: sample2
Binary: sample2
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:33:45 +0200
Source: sample2
Binary: sample2
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:33:45 +0200
Source: sample2
Binary: sample2
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:33:45 +0200
Source: sample4
Binary: sample4
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:33:45 +0200
Source: sample5
Binary: sample5
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
Changed-By: Raphael Hertzog hert...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:23:29 +0100
Source: alsa-oss
Binary: alsa-oss
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.0.17-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian ALSA Maintainers pkg-alsa-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:03:16 +0100
Source: brasero
Binary: brasero brasero-common libbrasero-media0 libbrasero-media-dev
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 2.28.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Pedro Fragoso
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:53:02 +0100
Source: cameleon
Binary: cameleon cameleon-doc libcameleon-ocaml-dev
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 1.9.19-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian OCaml Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:38:10 -0600
Source: cherokee
Binary: cherokee libcherokee-base0 libcherokee-base0-dev libcherokee-client0
libcherokee-client0-dev libcherokee-config0 libcherokee-config0-dev
libcherokee-server0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:59:22 +
Source: cups-pdf
Binary: cups-pdf
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.0-11
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian CUPS Maintainers pkg-cups-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:41:50 +0200
Source: cupt
Binary: libcupt-perl cupt
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.2.0
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Eugene V. Lyubimkin jac...@debian.org
Changed-By: Eugene V. Lyubimkin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:01:44 +0900
Source: egg
Binary: egg
Architecture: source all
Version: 4.0.6+0.20041122cvs-16
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: ISHIKAWA Mutsumi ishik...@debian.org
Changed-By: ISHIKAWA Mutsumi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:40:34 +0100
Source: eglibc
Binary: libc-bin libc-dev-bin glibc-doc eglibc-source locales locales-all nscd
libc6 libc6-dev libc6-dbg libc6-prof libc6-pic libc6-udeb libc6.1 libc6.1-dev
libc6.1-dbg libc6.1-prof
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:36:02 +
Source: empathy
Binary: empathy empathy-dbg empathy-doc libempathy-common libempathy30
libempathy30-dbg libempathy-doc libempathy-dev libempathy-gtk-doc
libempathy-gtk-common libempathy-gtk28
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:02:06 +
Source: epix1
Binary: epix1
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.2.6-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Julian Gilbey j...@debian.org
Changed-By: Julian Gilbey j...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:09:32 +0100
Source: exim4
Binary: exim4-base exim4-config exim4-daemon-light exim4 exim4-daemon-heavy
exim4-daemon-custom eximon4 exim4-dbg exim4-daemon-light-dbg
exim4-daemon-heavy-dbg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:48:26 -0400
Source: fakeroot
Binary: fakeroot
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.14.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Clint Adams sch...@debian.org
Changed-By: Clint Adams sch...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:16:22 -0400
Source: fakeroot
Binary: fakeroot
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.14.2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Clint Adams sch...@debian.org
Changed-By: Clint Adams sch...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:57:29 +0200
Source: freebsd-utils
Binary: freebsd-utils freebsd-utils-udeb kldutils kldutils-udeb kbdcontrol
freebsd-net-tools
Architecture: source kfreebsd-amd64
Version: 7.2-9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:44:22 +0100
Source: freebsd-libs
Binary: libsbuf0 libsbuf-dev libcam0 libcam-dev libgeom0 libgeom-dev libusbhid3
libusbhid-dev libkvm0 libkvm-dev libdevstat6 libdevstat-dev libipx2 libipx-dev
libkiconv3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:05:18 +
Source: git-core
Binary: git-core git-doc git-arch git-cvs git-svn git-email git-daemon-run
git-gui gitk gitweb
Architecture: all source
Version: 1:1.6.5.2-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:41:14 +0100
Source: glpi
Binary: glpi
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.72.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Pierre Chifflier pol...@debian.org
Changed-By: Pierre Chifflier pol...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:04:51 +0100
Source: gnome-desktop
Binary: gnome-about gnome-desktop-data libgnome-desktop-2-11
libgnome-desktop-dev
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 2.28.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:33:47 +0100
Source: gnome-session
Binary: gnome-session gnome-session-bin
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 2.28.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:06:31 +1300
Source: gource
Binary: gource
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 0.15-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Andrew Caudwell acaudw...@gmail.com
Changed-By: Andrew Caudwell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:14:12 +0100
Source: grdc
Binary: grdc
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.6.0-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Luca Falavigna dktrkr...@debian.org
Changed-By: Luca Falavigna dktrkr...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:34:56 -0400
Source: gq
Binary: gq
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.3.4-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian QA Group packa...@qa.debian.org
Changed-By: Barry deFreese bdefre...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:34:53 +0100
Source: gtkpod
Binary: gtkpod gtkpod-data
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 0.99.14-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: gtkpod Maintainers pkg-gtkpod-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:24:17 +0100
Source: haskell-hgl
Binary: libghc6-hgl-dev libghc6-hgl-prof libghc6-hgl-doc
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 3.2.0.0-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Haskell Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:04:43 +0100
Source: haskell-x11
Binary: libghc6-x11-dev libghc6-x11-prof libghc6-x11-doc
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 1.4.6.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Haskell Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:10:47 +0100
Source: haskell-x11-xft
Binary: libghc6-x11-xft-dev libghc6-x11-xft-prof libghc6-x11-xft-doc
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 0.3-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Haskell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:29:03 +0200
Source: htcheck-php
Binary: htcheck-php
Architecture: source all
Version: 1:2.0.0~rc1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marco Nenciarini mnen...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marco Nenciarini
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:07:58 +0100
Source: i3status
Binary: i3status
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 2.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Michael Stapelberg mich...@stapelberg.de
Changed-By: Michael Stapelberg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:55:02 +0800
Source: ibus
Binary: ibus libibus1 libibus-dev ibus-gtk python-ibus
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 1.2.0.20091024-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: LI Daobing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 13:25:38 +0100
Source: hostname
Binary: hostname
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 3.01
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Hostname Team hostname-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:29:46 +0100
Source: htcheck
Binary: htcheck
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1:2.0.0~rc1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Marco Nenciarini mnen...@debian.org
Changed-By: Marco Nenciarini
1 - 100 of 151 matches
Mail list logo
