On 2/18/2012 11:41 PM, Tim wrote:
Sorry for the delay. Is this still a problem when trying to update?
I have not tried the update since the update generated the report.
It is not clear what the information in the report was trying to say.
lsb_release -a shows:
No LSB modules are available.
Public bug reported:
While trying an update, the update manager failed,
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.04
Package: update-manager 1:0.150.5.1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.38-13.55-generic 2.6.38.8
Uname: Linux 2.6.38-13-generic i686
NonfreeKernelModules: openafs
Architecture: i386
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/932148
Title:
Update failed, Have older hardware, OpenAFS and sun-java6
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
** Also affects: wpasupplicant
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
Do not link with libpcsclite.so.1 but use dlopen() instead
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/664007
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
I agree with Ludovic that the Ubuntu decision to relocate libpcsclite.so from
/usr/lib to /lib was made to address
a linking problem with wpa_supplicant, without regard to the effects it would
have on the rest of the
applications that use libpcsclite.so. The fix only solved the linking problem,
** Package changed: glibc (Ubuntu) = libnss-ldap (Ubuntu)
--
nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292971
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Server Team, which is subscribed to libnss-ldap in ubuntu.
--
Ubuntu-server-bugs
A memory leak in libnss-ldap over time can cause the nscd
process to grow extremely large. For example one nscd
process that had been running for three months was using
6GB of swap!
The problem is in the original Padl nss-ldap in at least versions
258, 261 and 265. Ubuntu Hardy uses 258,
** Patch added: Test patch for nscd to help with valgrind
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41231375/nscd.test.patch
--
nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292971
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
** Attachment added: test script to us valgrind with nscd
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/41231479/valgrind.nscd.exit.sh
--
nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292971
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is
** Package changed: glibc (Ubuntu) = libnss-ldap (Ubuntu)
--
nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292971
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
Also reported to original developers as bug #418
http://bugzilla.padl.com/show_bug.cgi?id=418
** Bug watch added: PADL Bugzilla #418
http://bugzilla.padl.com/show_bug.cgi?id=418
--
nscd leaking memory using libnss-ldap
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/292971
You received this bug
Copy of note sent on 1/8/2009:
Attached are the server cert (auth2.it.anl.gov), the intermediate cert
(f0a38a80.0)
and the CA self signed cert (7651b327.0) a debug version of verify.c
and partial output of an ldapsearch using the debug.c
My patch has been #if 0'ed out at line 151.
Lets
Mathias Gug wrote:
@Andy:
Could you describe the X509 certs and CA you're using?
We were using ldap and Verisign, and the root CA was a V2 from 1999
which signed an intermediate cert that signed the server certs.
I submitted to gnutls a few changes to allow for stoping at the
intermediate
Mathias Gug wrote:
@Andy:
Could you describe the X509 certs and CA you're using?
We were using ldap and Verisign, and the root CA was a V2 from 1999
which signed an intermediate cert that signed the server certs.
I submitted to gnutls a few changes to allow for stoping at the
intermediate
Copy of note sent on 1/8/2009:
Attached are the server cert (auth2.it.anl.gov), the intermediate cert
(f0a38a80.0)
and the CA self signed cert (7651b327.0) a debug version of verify.c
and partial output of an ldapsearch using the debug.c
My patch has been #if 0'ed out at line 151.
Lets
Mathias Gug wrote:
One workaround is to put all of the CA certs in the trusted CA
certificate file.
Yes, that is what we have had to do.
The real fix is to get the gnutls people to support certificate
directories, like OpenSSL. Why the rush to convert to gnutls
when it has so many issues.
Mathias Gug wrote:
One workaround is to put all of the CA certs in the trusted CA
certificate file.
Yes, that is what we have had to do.
The real fix is to get the gnutls people to support certificate
directories, like OpenSSL. Why the rush to convert to gnutls
when it has so many issues.
Tried the Intrepid version, looks like it works. Thanks.
Jamie Strandboge wrote:
Dapper through Intrepid have been copied to -proposed now.
** Tags added: verification-needed
--
Douglas E. Engert deeng...@anl.gov
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne,
Thanks.
Jamie Strandboge wrote:
Upstream released 2.4.3 to address both the vulnerability and the known
regressions. Reviewing upstream's mailing list shows no regressions so
far with this version. I've sync'd Jaunty with 2.4.2-6, which brings its
patches in line with upstream 2.4.3, so I am
Thanks.
Jamie Strandboge wrote:
Upstream released 2.4.3 to address both the vulnerability and the known
regressions. Reviewing upstream's mailing list shows no regressions so
far with this version. I've sync'd Jaunty with 2.4.2-6, which brings its
patches in line with upstream 2.4.3, so I am
Public bug reported:
Using the Ubuntu version of libgnutls13_2.0.4-1ubuntu2.3 on Hardy 8.04.1
ldaps: has stopped working. This looks like it is related to
the December changes that are also in gnutls-2.6.3.
ldapsearch -d 1 -H ldaps://...
TLS: peer cert untrusted or revoked (0x82)
** Attachment added: T:\gnutls.verify.patch.txt
http://launchpadlibrarian.net/20996163/T%3A%5Cgnutls.verify.patch.txt
--
gnutls fails to use Verisign CA cert without a Basic Constraint
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/314915
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
22 matches
Mail list logo
