Bug#935336: jsvc cannot find libjvm.so as installed by JDK/JRE packages
On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 07:43:28 -0400 "Kevin P. Fleming" wrote: > /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-arm64/lib/$(uname -m)/server On X86_64 the directory is called "amd64", which is not the output of `uname -m`. I guess it is rather the arch suffix of the jvm dir. You may also just set a softlink in the lib directory pointing to "." named after the arch suffix. For the example above: cd /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-arm64/lib/ ln -s . arm64
Bug#955825: isc-dhcp-client: wrong ipv6 prefix length set automatically
Package: isc-dhcp-client
Version: 4.3.1-6+deb8u4
Severity: important
Tags: ipv6
Requesting an address with dhclient over dhcp6 does not always set the ipv6
prefix length
right. The address received seems always to get a /128 prefix set, even if the
dhcp6 server
sends another one.
I would expect dhclient to set the prefix lenght, if the dhcp6 server sends one.
The code in /sbin/dhclient-script under the relevant section "### DHCPv6
Handlers" is the
same in Devuan Jessie, where I used reportbug to write this bug, Debian Stretch
(4.3.5-3+deb9u1)
and in Debian Sid (4.4.1-2.1+b2).
In the code that does set the ipv6 address using iproute2 there is no prefix
mentioned at all.
See line 385 and the following:
385 BOUND6|RENEW6|REBIND6)
386 if [ "${new_ip6_address}" ]; then
387 # set leased IP
388 ip -6 addr add ${new_ip6_address} \
389 dev ${interface} scope global
390 fi
It could be that /sbin/dhclient should set the prefix to the address, I don't
know.
This part has two problems: It should also be called upon reason REBOOT6 (see
man dhclient-script(8))
and it should set the prefix if one was given (and not already present with the
address). Something
like the following would help:
385 BOUND6|RENEW6|REBIND6|REBOOT6)
386 if [ "${new_ip6_address}" ]; then
387
388 # check wether a prefix was passed and add it to the address
389 if [ -n "$new_ip6_prefixlen" ]; then
390
new_ip6_address_and_prefix="${new_ip6_address}/${new_ip6_prefixlen}"
391 else
392 new_ip6_address_and_prefix="${new_ip6_address}"
393 fi
394
395 # set leased IP
396 ip -6 addr add ${new_ip6_address_and_prefix} \
397 dev ${interface} scope global
398 fi
What really confuses me, is that ISC did change the IPv6 handling in the
dhclient-script, but it is not
brought to Debian. In the upstream version they call a function
"add_ipv6_addr_with_DAD". So I guess, the
bug is not present there. If I watch at the source package of 4.4.1-2.1, I do
see the upstream changes, but
they are not present in the script that the binary package of 4.4.1-2.1+b2
delivers. Sorry, I don't
understand what's going on here.
Thank you for your help.
Regards, Adrian.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.11
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-10-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Init: sysvinit (via /sbin/init)
Versions of packages isc-dhcp-client depends on:
ii debianutils 4.4+b1
ii iproute2 3.16.0-2
ii isc-dhcp-common 4.3.1-6+deb8u4
ii libc6 2.19-18+deb8u10
ii libdns-export100 1:9.9.5.dfsg-9+deb8u18
ii libirs-export91 1:9.9.5.dfsg-9+deb8u18
ii libisc-export95 1:9.9.5.dfsg-9+deb8u18
isc-dhcp-client recommends no packages.
Versions of packages isc-dhcp-client suggests:
pn avahi-autoipd
pn resolvconf
-- no debconf information
Bug#867623: heirloom-mailx is not an alternative for /usr/bin/mailx
On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 15:41:50 +0200 Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > |Oy. I gather, then, that s-nail cannot be an alternative unless some > |sort of political settlement is brokered, which may never happen. Alas. > > That was my impression at least. Of course this MUA is still very > restricted, so in parts i can even understand the trouble. We are ...so why isn't heirlom-mailx not just added with a lower priority than BSD mail? It would not disturb anyone and those who dislike mailx from BSD mail or wherever could easily change it to heirlom-mailx. No one ever said that an alternative must be switch compatible, I think. See the Debian Wiki [1] where a discussion on debian-user is linked, which talks about vim, nvi and elvis, which do not support the same key strokes and are nevertheless alternatives. Actually I could just state that I've used to use a dot to end the interacive mail command since the very early nineties, which doesn't work any more today. So what's that reasoning about a missing -a switch compared? The same level of unimportance Please just add it as an alternative with lower priority. If anyone feels distracted even by such a non-invasive method, (s)he could open a bug, I suggest and the discussion could start over. Regards, Adrian. [1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianAlternatives
Bug#823064: libmail-srs-perl: decode address with smashed case returns no decoded address
Package: libmail-srs-perl Version: 0.31-5 Severity: normal Tags: upstream Dear Maintainer, Decoding an SRS tagged address with all lower case issues an error message and no decoded address. The doc at http://www.libsrs2.org/srs/srs.pdf, section 4.1 says: [...] "Consequently the Mail::SRS implementation is not case sensitive." A similar description can be read in the source's comments in SRS.pm. Hence libmail-srs-perl should decode an address even when the case was smahed. Example: ente:/home/adi$ srsc FORWARD t...@original-to.example.tld forwarding-service.tld SRS0=oOhFyc++V0Szn3mOry/ivIMV=P5=original-to.example.tld=t...@forwarding-service.tld ente:/home/adi$ srsc REVERSE srs0=oohfyc++v0szn3mory/ivimv=p5=original-to.example.tld=t...@forwarding-service.tld ERROR: Parse error in `srs0=oohfyc++v0szn3mory/ivimv=p5=original-to.example.tld=test': SRS: Case insensitive hash match detected. Someone smashed case in the local-part. at /usr/share/perl5/Mail/SRS.pm line 421, line 1. I do not get the decoded address back with a reverse call of a lower cased SRS address. Without it, it gets difficult to accept such bounce messages in a mail server config. I would expect the decoded address and maybe a warning, not an error. The version of libmail-srs-perl is the same in all Debian suites. Best regards, Adrian. -- System Information: Debian Release: 7.10 APT prefers oldstable APT policy: (500, 'oldstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-0.bpo.4-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages libmail-srs-perl depends on: ii libdigest-hmac-perl 1.03+dfsg-1 ii libmldbm-perl2.04-1 ii perl 5.14.2-21+deb7u3 libmail-srs-perl recommends no packages. libmail-srs-perl suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
Bug#633062: btrfs-tools: btrfs fs: Hardlinks-per-directory limit hit
Package: btrfs-tools Version: 0.19+20100601-3 Severity: normal Tags: upstream I hit the Hardlinks-per-directory limit of a btrfs file system, when copying a large existing backuppc archive from an ext3 file system to a newly created btrfs file system. One of several similar error is: tar: ./pc//168/f%2fusr%2flocal/fsrc/fopenttd/f.svn/fprop-base/fdisaster_cmd.c.svn-base: Cannot hard link to `./cpool/1/a/b/1ab6fd829106709f984790594fe94756': Too many links This behaviour of btrfs is known and had been discussed under [1] (in detail), the latest status I've found is here [2] (short summary). The developers of btrfs wanted to have a real world example in [1] of hitting the limitation, so unfortunately it exists, that's what this report is about. Please let btrfs overcome this limitation. This bug actually belongs to the btrfs kernel module, but I see it better off here. Otherwise, please teach me if I'm wrong. Regards, Adrian. [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/3427 [2] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg05640.html -- System Information: Debian Release: 6.0.2 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.32-5-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages btrfs-tools depends on: ii e2fslibs1.41.12-4stable1 ext2/ext3/ext4 file system librari ii libc6 2.11.2-10Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libcomerr2 1.41.12-4stable1 common error description library ii libuuid12.17.2-9 Universally Unique ID library ii zlib1g 1:1.2.3.4.dfsg-3 compression library - runtime btrfs-tools recommends no packages. btrfs-tools suggests no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#597814: tomcat6: dpkg error reported in postint script
Package: tomcat6 Version: 6.0.28-6 Severity: important I tried to upgrade tomcat6 6.0.28-1 using tomcat6 6.0.28-6 which results in the following error: Setting up tomcat6 (6.0.28-6) ... sed: -e expression #1, char 151: unknown option to `s' dpkg: error processing tomcat6 (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.6 APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages tomcat6 depends on: ii adduser 3.110 add and remove users and groups ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.24 Debian configuration management sy ii tomcat6-common6.0.28-6 Servlet and JSP engine -- common f ii ucf 3.0016 Update Configuration File: preserv Versions of packages tomcat6 recommends: pn authbind none (no description available) Versions of packages tomcat6 suggests: ii tomcat6-admin 6.0.28-6 Servlet and JSP engine -- admin we ii tomcat6-docs 6.0.28-6 Servlet and JSP engine -- document pn tomcat6-examples none (no description available) pn tomcat6-user none (no description available) -- debconf information: tomcat6/javaopts: -Djava.awt.headless=true -Xmx128m -Djava.awt.headless=true -Xmx1024M -Djava.net.preferIPv4Stack -Dmailwebform.configdir=/etc/mailwebform tomcat6/groupname: tomcat6 tomcat6/username: tomcat6 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#588446: [OBSOLETE] #588446,when entering menu 2. [S]elect: dselect exits immediately
Version 1.15.7.2 (from testing) doesn't show this behavior. Sorry for not testing before reporting. Please close this bug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#588446: when entering menu 2. [S]elect: dselect exits immediately
Package: dselect Version: 1.14.29 Severity: important When entering menu 2. [S]elect, dselect exits immediately with an error message: dselect: failed to create baselist pad: Success Purging and installing again or updating the package list does not help anything. Aptitude and apt-get do function normally. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.5 APT prefers stable APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.26-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages dselect depends on: ii dpkg 1.14.29Debian package management system ii libc6 2.11.2-2 Embedded GNU C Library: Shared lib ii libgcc1 1:4.3.2-1.1GCC support library ii libncursesw5 5.7+20081213-1 shared libraries for terminal hand ii libstdc++64.3.2-1.1 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3 dselect recommends no packages. dselect suggests no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#562575: installation-reports: testing on iso-cd weekly build of powerpc of 100118 shows same behaviour
Package: installation-reports Severity: normal The CD image of testing weekly builds of Jan, 18th 2010 shows the same behaviour: Looping with segmentation fault, INFO: kbd-mode: setting console mode to Unicode (UTF-8) Upgrading to testing from Lenny is not concerned, the current 2.6.30 kernel of testing does boot without this error. -- Package-specific info: Boot method: CD Image version: http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/weekly-builds/powerpc/iso-cd/debian-testing-powerpc-CD-1.iso Date: 21st January 2010 Machine: Apple PowerBook G4 12 Base System Installation Checklist: [O] = OK, [E] = Error (please elaborate below), [ ] = didn't try it Initial boot: [E] Detect network card:[ ] Configure network: [ ] Detect CD: [ ] Load installer modules: [ ] Detect hard drives: [ ] Partition hard drives: [ ] Install base system:[ ] Clock/timezone setup: [ ] User/password setup:[ ] Install tasks: [ ] Install boot loader:[ ] Overall install:[ ] Comments/Problems: Installation fails. See above for details. -- Please make sure that the hardware-summary log file, and any other installation logs that you think would be useful are attached to this report. Please compress large files using gzip. Once you have filled out this report, mail it to sub...@bugs.debian.org. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#551600: fixed
Installing the new package mdadm 3.0-3.1 fixes this bug. Bug #541884 closes this bug. I upgraded my mdadm 3.0-2 to 3.0-3.1 and now I am able to boot again. This wasn't possible anymore after having upgraded udev. If you trashed your system with mdadm 3.0-2 installed and a dist-upgrdade to udev 146-1 or later, you can do the following to be able to boot again: - boot a live CD like grml - start your disks (using software raid try: Start mdadm-raid) - mount them as it is in your system usually under /mnt/your disk - prepare for a chroot: - mount -o bind /dev /mnt/your disk/dev - mount -t proc none /mnt/your disk/proc - mount -t sysfs none /mnt/your disk/sys - start chroot /mnt/your disk /bin/bash - download and dpkg --install mdadm_3.0-3.1_... - exit the chroot and reboot This fixed it for me. Regards, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#551600: [mdadm] package error?
This is because of #541884. It should have been fixed in mdadm (3.0-3.1), which didn't get into testing because of new bugs. That means someone who dist-upgrades testing right now, breaks its system. There is a warning displayed by udev during installation, but at this time it may already be too late. Could this be prevented somehow? Could mdmad (3.0-2) be altered to conflict/break/whatever with udev (146-1) and higher? Regards, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#289187: Bug #289187: clamav-daemon: Unaligned Trap on alpha
Hallo Falk und Stephen Quoting Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I would like to debug this. Is there a simple recipe to reproduce the problem? I do not see a clear pattern of occurence: It seems it happens only when infected messages are processed, but not always. (I'm using clamav in conjunction with amavis and exim to scan emails). It never happens with clean messages. Load, apparently. All of the details are in the bug log, unfortunately - I have nothing that was sent to me out of band. Meanwhile I doubt that load is necessary: I wrote something of 500-600 Messages a day, which is about one message every other minute... I rechecked the times when none of these unaligned traps occured: There were almost no infected messages. I could send you tons of infected messages to feed your clamd and see if you can reproduce the error. Danke für die Hilfe! Liebe Grüsse, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#304503: dccproc: unaligned trap
Package: dcc-client Version: 1.2.74-2 Severity: normal dccproc reports an unaligned trap in the syslog: kernel: dccproc(4427): unaligned trap at 00012001a428: 00011fffaa92 28 1 This didn't happen with previous versions (1.2.74-1 and before). It seems to occur on every call as far as I can see in the syslog: Before almost all entries of a delivered eMail, I find the above message. Regards, Adrian. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: alpha Kernel: Linux 2.4.27-2-smp Locale: LANG=en_GB.ISO-8859-15, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.ISO-8859-15 (charmap=ISO-8859-15) Versions of packages dcc-client depends on: ii dcc-common 1.2.74-2 Distributed Checksum Clearinghouse ii libc6.1 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#298136: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-smp: aieee with isp1020
Package: kernel-image-2.4.27-2-smp Version: 2.4.27-7 Severity: normal Under heavy disk load the kernel aieees (killing interrupt handler) and the machine stops. Feeding the stacktrace to ksymoops, it produces the following output: ksymoops 2.4.9 on alpha 2.4.27-2-smp. Options used -V (default) -k /proc/ksyms (default) -l /proc/modules (default) -o /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/ (default) -m /boot/System.map-2.4.27-2-smp (default) Warning: You did not tell me where to find symbol information. I will assume that the log matches the kernel and modules that are running right now and I'll use the default options above for symbol resolution. If the current kernel and/or modules do not match the log, you can get more accurate output by telling me the kernel version and where to find map, modules, ksyms etc. ksymoops -h explains the options. Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/sd_mod.o for module sd_mod has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/net/unix/unix.o for module unix has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/fs/ext3/ext3.o for module ext3 has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/fs/jbd/jbd.o for module jbd has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/md/raid5.o for module raid5 has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/md/xor.o for module xor has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/md/raid1.o for module raid1 has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/md/raid0.o for module raid0 has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/md/md.o for module md has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/sym53c8xx_2/sym53c8xx_2.o for module sym53c8xx_2 has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/qlogicisp.o for module qlogicisp has changed since load Warning (expand_objects): object /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/scsi_mod.o for module scsi_mod has changed since load Warning (compare_maps): mismatch on symbol tulip_debug , tulip says fffc00314d7c, /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/net/tulip/tulip.o says fffc0030600c. Ignoring /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/net/tulip/tulip.o entry Warning (compare_maps): mismatch on symbol sysctl_unix_max_dgram_qlen , unix says fffc002abdf8, /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/net/unix/unix.o says fffc002a6000. Ignoring /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/net/unix/unix.o entry Warning (compare_maps): mismatch on symbol scsi_command_size , scsi_mod says fffc00219e20, /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/scsi_mod.o says fffc001fc000. Ignoring /lib/modules/2.4.27-2-smp/kernel/drivers/scsi/scsi_mod.o entry Reading Oops report from the terminal pc = [fffc0021ceb4] ra = [fffc0021ceb4] ps = 0007Not tainted v0 = t0 = pc = [fffc0021ceb4] ra = [fffc0021ceb4] ps = 0007Not tainted t1 = Using defaults from ksymoops -t elf64-alpha -a alpha fffc0021d0a0 t2 v0 = t0 = t1 = fffc0021d0a0 = t3 = fc00fe8a2000 t4 = t5 = fft2 = t3 = fc00fe8a2000 t4 = fffc5a4dc0 t6 = fc5b2c78 t7 = fc50 s0 t5 = fc5a4dc0 t6 = fc5b2c78 t7 = fc50 = s1 = 0002 s2 = fc00fff07800 s3 = ffs0 = s1 = 0002 s2 = fc00fff07800 fffc00fff078c0 s4 = 0002 s5 = fc5a9670 s6 s3 = fc00fff078c0 s4 = 0002 s5 = fc5a9670 = a0 = s6 = fc00fe8a2040 a1 = a2 = fc503ed8 aa0 = fc00fe8a2040 a1 = a2 = fc503ed8 3 = fc00ea18fe78 a4 = fc00ea18fed8 a5 = fc5068c0 t8 = a3 = fc00ea18fe78 a4 = fc00ea18fed8 a5 = fc5068c0 001f t9 = 0027239afdf5 t10= 4e00 tt8 = 001f t9 = 0027239afdf5 t10= 4e00 11= 006d pv = fc325f50 at = gp = t11= 006d pv = fc325f50 at = fffc0022fa78 sp = fc503de8 gp = fffc0022fa78 sp = fc503de8 Trace:fc3186a4 fc3197c8 fc32ae3c fc319ff4 fc3135b8 fc314d40 fc32ca70 fc3815e4 fc314d24 fc3815e4 fc3100d4 fc31001c Code:
Bug#289187: bug not solved in clamav 0.81-2
Hello Stephen Unfortunately I have to tell you that in the newer version - clamav 0.81-2 (ClamAV 0.81/697/Wed Feb 2 16:15:56 2005) - the bug reported is still present: Feb 2 18:29:16 ente kernel: clamd(13851): unaligned trap at 02037c60: 02953db2 28 0 Feb 2 18:29:16 ente kernel: clamd(13851): unaligned trap at 02068414: 00012079ba9b 28 0 Feb 2 18:29:16 ente kernel: clamd(13851): unaligned trap at 02068414: 00012079baae 28 0 Feb 2 18:29:16 ente kernel: clamd(13851): unaligned trap at 02068414: 00012079bae1 28 0 Could this be alpha specific? Regards, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#292344: dovecot-common: upgrade fails
Hello Jaldhar Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote: On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, Adrian Zaugg wrote: Please open /var/lib/dpkg/info/dovecot-common.postinst in an editor and replace the line that says set -e with set -x then run it and send me the output. Then we can see exactly where it is failing. + chown root /etc/ssl/private/dovecot.pem chown: cannot access `/etc/ssl/private/dovecot.pem': No such file or directory Ups, is that a directory that's needed by policy? I might have removed it then...*sigh*. It seems this is the case, so I'm very sorry to have bothered you! I remeber the trick with set -x! Regards, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#292344: dovecot-common: upgrade fails
Package: dovecot-common Version: 0.99.13-3 Severity: normal Dear Jaldhar Upgrading dovecot-common fails with the following error: Setting up dovecot-common (0.99.13-3) ... Creating generic self-signed certificate: /etc/ssl/certs/dovecot.pem (replace with hand-crafted or authorized one if needed). dpkg: error processing dovecot-common (--configure): subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1 (Sorry, I can't find out what the version it tries to replace.) It doesn't matter if a file /etc/ssl/certs/dovecot.pem already exists or not. Please tell me, if you need more information! Thank you and kind regards, Adrian. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: alpha Kernel: Linux 2.4.27-1-smp Locale: LANG=en_GB.ISO-8859-15, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.ISO-8859-15 (charmap=ISO-8859-15) Versions of packages dovecot-common depends on: ii libc6.1 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libldap22.1.30-3 OpenLDAP libraries ii libmysqlclient103.23.56-2LGPL-licensed client library for M ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpq3 7.4.6-6 PostgreSQL C client library ii libsasl22.1.19-1.5 Authentication abstraction library ii libssl0.9.7 0.9.7e-2 SSL shared libraries ii openssl 0.9.7e-2 Secure Socket Layer (SSL) binary a ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-3compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#289187: clamd: unaligned trap
Hola Stephen You convinced me, I can dare the test. It's just your binaries won't run on my machine, it's an alpha. If you can provide and are willing to compile for alpha, I will do the testing. Stephen Gran wrote: On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 01:43:27AM +0100, Adrian Zaugg said: Take care, and thanks for all your help in any case, Compared to your work, it's close to nothing... Thank you! Kind Regards, Adrian. # cat /proc/version Linux version 2.4.27-1-smp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-2)) #1 SMP Thu Dec 2 08:58:06 CET 2004 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#290830: rootservers choice is exclusive
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: Your idea is politically nice because it treats all sets of root nameservers as equal. You do not agree with RFC 2826 ? Sure I agree with RFCs, this is not the question of agreeing here... I think there are two duiscussions here: Is using orsn violating RFC 2826 and how to get dnsdoctor working with both root server networks. For the first question I am not able to tell (I read it, but it doesn't get clear for me). Sure, the answer to this question would definitely tell how to treat the rootserver problem. For the latter I see it as a user of dnsdoctor. If you take the point of view that orsn and icann are both equal in regard to rfc and a working installation, no errors at all should be given using either network. If one sees icann as the only legal source for dns root servers, there shouldn't be an option to change it. So I agree with you that this is a wishlist bug. Thank you, Adrian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
