Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 11:33:27PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: I am reading the online HTML version at http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/index.en.html I hope it's the one you're referring to... Yep, that's the one. Fine, I see that it has a version number in the footer (currently 3.9): should I go on mentioning *that* number in the Version: pseudo-header of future bug reports? Yes please. Also provide the URL of the precise location and the name of the chapter (to make it easier to track which parts of the manual you refer to). Thanks Javier signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 15:44:56 +0200 Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: On Sat, Oct 14, 2006 at 11:33:27PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] Fine, I see that it has a version number in the footer (currently 3.9): should I go on mentioning *that* number in the Version: pseudo-header of future bug reports? Yes please. Also provide the URL of the precise location and the name of the chapter (to make it easier to track which parts of the manual you refer to). OK, I'll try and remember to do so! :) Bye. -- But it is also tradition that times *must* and always do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_ . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgpOjG0pEtWsz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 07:35:28PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: if you could foolproof the full manual I would really appreciate it Well, I'm (slowly) reading it and I am reporting bugs whenever I see something that doesn't look right... I don't know if that fits your definition of foolproofing... :p Should have said proofreading (bunk) Take into account that I am *not* a security guru, even though I am interested in the topic. Well, so much the better, if you find a section confusing because it got into too much mambo-jambo I would appreciate if you would report that too. (but use the version published at the website, as it is built from the latest CVS sources and might be more up-to-date than the version distributed in the harden-doc package). I am reading the online HTML version at http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/index.en.html I hope it's the one you're referring to... Yep, that's the one. Regards Javier signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 09:58:56 +0200 Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 07:35:28PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: if you could foolproof the full manual I would really appreciate it Well, I'm (slowly) reading it and I am reporting bugs whenever I see something that doesn't look right... I don't know if that fits your definition of foolproofing... :p Should have said proofreading (bunk) Ah, that's it! I think that what I am doing is actually proofreading the full manual... Take into account that I am *not* a security guru, even though I am interested in the topic. Well, so much the better, if you find a section confusing because it got into too much mambo-jambo I would appreciate if you would report that too. Good, if I find one, I'll file a bug report. (but use the version published at the website, as it is built from the latest CVS sources and might be more up-to-date than the version distributed in the harden-doc package). I am reading the online HTML version at http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/index.en.html I hope it's the one you're referring to... Yep, that's the one. Fine, I see that it has a version number in the footer (currently 3.9): should I go on mentioning *that* number in the Version: pseudo-header of future bug reports? -- But it is also tradition that times *must* and always do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_ . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgpoyVdpLiF6Z.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 00:29:23 +0200 Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote: On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:29:45PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: [...] There seems to be a little typo in section 9.1 _Best practices for security review and design_: [...] This has been fixed in CVS and in the 3.9 version I uploaded today. Ah yes, I see. Thanks for the report, however, You are welcome! :) if you could foolproof the full manual I would really appreciate it Well, I'm (slowly) reading it and I am reporting bugs whenever I see something that doesn't look right... I don't know if that fits your definition of foolproofing... :p Take into account that I am *not* a security guru, even though I am interested in the topic. (but use the version published at the website, as it is built from the latest CVS sources and might be more up-to-date than the version distributed in the harden-doc package). I am reading the online HTML version at http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/index.en.html I hope it's the one you're referring to... -- But it is also tradition that times *must* and always do change, my friend. -- from _Coming to America_ . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgp5RF0Boey4D.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
Package: harden-doc Version: 3.8 Severity: minor Hi! There seems to be a little typo in section 9.1 _Best practices for security review and design_: the cost in this later phase is sixty sixty times higher The word sixty is repeated twice. I think the fix should be s/sixty sixty/sixty/ (where the instance to be retained is the first one, which is bold). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#392699: harden-doc: the word sixty is repeated twice
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 11:29:45PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: Hi! Hi there. There seems to be a little typo in section 9.1 _Best practices for security review and design_: the cost in this later phase is sixty sixty times higher This has been fixed in CVS and in the 3.9 version I uploaded today. Thanks for the report, however, if you could foolproof the full manual I would really appreciate it (but use the version published at the website, as it is built from the latest CVS sources and might be more up-to-date than the version distributed in the harden-doc package). Regards Javier signature.asc Description: Digital signature
