Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Package: kernel-source-2.6.11 Version: 2.6.11-4 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system (Sorry if this is a dupe, i had filled it against kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic). Since kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic 2.6.11-4, the kernel-image won't boot. The first error message says something like: Can't load shared object file libc.so.6 The second error message says it can't find sda1. My hypothesis is that the necessary modules for my onboard SATA controller are no longer included in the initrd image. I HAVEN'T modified /etc/mkinitrd/mkinitrd.conf. I've a pretty common Asus K8V-X motherboard which SATA ctrler requires at least scsi_mod, sata_via and libata to work. Booting with the current kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64-generic image works fine. I'm happy i kept my very old image before upgrading 2.6.11!! -Pascal -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-11-amd64-generic Locale: LANG=fr_CA, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Bug#316455: marked as done (kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4)
Your message dated Fri, 1 Jul 2005 02:08:36 -0400 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Was a mistake has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2005 00:06:10 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jun 30 17:06:10 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.203] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Do92o-0001CL-00; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:06:10 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 49so91536wri for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:06:08 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JTEoTb2hD11TavWU4/0PyaG+A2TKCeudGzcQjc1uzHs3RoWm21PRVkxlDxeuFwkDMp7Gb1iJ1JS+i+Ia/aAkYZF8Rj7eyHf50d/HLgdSxI73/syh9fbsk1ReMdlaHvHi96fzotlVzbCQkP8VI7VJ86aWIDrMyffnSa2QpkkIAHk= Received: by 10.54.19.68 with SMTP id 68mr248226wrs; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?10.0.0.2? ([67.68.129.75]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 67sm391256wra.2005.06.30.17.06.07; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:06:06 -0400 From: Pascal Giard [EMAIL PROTECTED] User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050611) X-Accept-Language: fr, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: kernel-source-2.6.11-amd64-generic Version: 2.6.11-4 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system (Sorry if this is a dupe, i had filled it against kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic). Since kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic 2.6.11-4, the kernel-image won't boot. The first error message says something like: Can't load shared object file libc.so.6 The second error message says it can't find sda1. My hypothesis is that the necessary modules for my onboard SATA controller are no longer included in the initrd image. I HAVEN'T modified /etc/mkinitrd/mkinitrd.conf. I've a pretty common Asus K8V-X motherboard which SATA ctrler requires at least scsi_mod, sata_via and libata to work. Booting with the current kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64-generic image works fine. I'm happy i kept my very old image before upgrading 2.6.11!! -Pascal -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-11-amd64-generic Locale: LANG=fr_CA, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA (charmap=ISO-8859-1) --- Received: (at 316455-done) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2005 06:08:39 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jun 30 23:08:39 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.207] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoEhb-0003vV-00; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:08:39 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i34so241261wra for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:08:36 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=Q2xvDoLaKDR8dpcV4MAB1VVHX+WAUoYuJ4zlo7EhwUk2Sgkl8WILB2ZUxQca8JAjb2aqar7glof1GBOa2Lc0wQofYc2sFPdNQmYjDcT0EgIMWsqt1ZGfKhS39ApZZ9M6hAAUYZljrx0yjAZ6sFkWikkHPbdwE8lRUUregKGajsk= Received: by 10.54.15.38 with SMTP id 38mr1142810wro; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.96.17 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 02:08:36 -0400 From: Pascal Giard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pascal Giard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Was a mistake Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 316476 kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' Bug reassigned from package `kernel-source-2.6.11' to `kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic'. merge 316476 316453 Bug#316453: kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' Merged 316453 316476. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
reassign 316476 kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic merge 316476 316453 thanks On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:10:04AM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Package: kernel-source-2.6.11 Version: 2.6.11-4 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system (Sorry if this is a dupe, i had filled it against kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic). Well, given that you filed three bugs all about the same issue, yes, two of them would seem to be duplicates. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316477: apache2-mpm-worker fails to execute any CGIs!
Package: apache2-mpm-worker
Version: 2.0.54-4
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
With mpm-worker and cgid, CGIs can't execute, because somewhere compiled
into the code is that path /var/run/cgisock which is quite different
from the /var/run/apache2/cgisock that comes specified in the cgid.conf
file! Without doing an strace, I would never have been able to figure
it out. Strace output, abreviated ~:^)
.
.
.
5794 ... poll resumed [{fd=8, events=POLLIN, revents=POLLIN}], 1, 15000) = 1
5794 read(8, GET /cgi-bin/env.pl HTTP/1.1\r\nHo..., 8000) = 373
5794 gettimeofday({1120197035, 62657}, NULL) = 0
5794 stat64(/usr/lib/cgi-bin/env.pl, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0755, st_size=116,
...}) = 0
5794 lstat64(/usr/lib/cgi-bin/env.pl, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0755, st_size=116,
...}) = 0
5794 getpid() = 5783
5794 socket(PF_FILE, SOCK_STREAM, 0) = 9
5794 connect(9, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path=/var/run/cgisock}, 110) = -1 ENOENT
(No such file or directory)
5794 close(9) = 0
5794 gettimeofday({1120197035, 63709}, NULL) = 0
5794 write(6, [Thu Jun 30 22:50:35 2005] [erro..., 162) = 162
5794 stat64(/var/log/apache2/cgi.log, 0xb66b86ec) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
5794 open(/var/log/apache2/cgi.log, O_WRONLY|O_APPEND|O_CREAT, 0666) = -1
EACCES (Permission denied)
5794 writev(8, [{HTTP/1.1 503 Service Temporarily..., 272}, {!DOCTYPE HTML
PUBLIC \-//IETF//..., 470}], 2) = 742
5794 write(7, 10.1.1.15 - - [30/Jun/2005:22:50..., 168) = 168
5794 shutdown(8, 1 /* send */) = 0
.
.
.
Contents of /etc/apache2/mods-enable/cgid.conf as it comes from the
debian factory:
# Socket thingy for CGI.
ScriptSock /var/run/apache2/cgisock
So you can see there is a bit of a problem there. I don't know why
the server is ignoring this directive and using /var/run/cgisock, but
/var/run/cgisock is just wrong anyway.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.11.11c3
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Versions of packages apache2-mpm-worker depends on:
ii apache2-common 2.0.54-4 next generation, scalable, extenda
ii libapr0 2.0.54-4 the Apache Portable Runtime
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libdb4.24.2.52-18Berkeley v4.2 Database Libraries [
ii libexpat1 1.95.8-3 XML parsing C library - runtime li
ii libldap22.1.30-8 OpenLDAP libraries
ii libpcre34.5-1.2 Perl 5 Compatible Regular Expressi
ii libssl0.9.7 0.9.7e-3 SSL shared libraries
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-4compression library - runtime
-- no debconf information
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:10:04AM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Package: kernel-source-2.6.11 Version: 2.6.11-4 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system (Sorry if this is a dupe, i had filled it against kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic). kernel-source-2.6.11 is probably a better place than kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic, as it seems likely the bug is in the code, rather than the config. In either case, could you pick one, assign both the bugs to it, and merge the bugs (or alternatively close one). The BTS doesn't sport the kernel's split packaging very well, but it seems better to avoid duplicates. On the up side, as of 2.6.12, the packages will have a single source, and this problem will go away to some extent. Sorry I can't offer much help on the bug itself for now, hopefully someone else can. Since kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic 2.6.11-4, the kernel-image won't boot. The first error message says something like: Can't load shared object file libc.so.6 The second error message says it can't find sda1. My hypothesis is that the necessary modules for my onboard SATA controller are no longer included in the initrd image. I HAVEN'T modified /etc/mkinitrd/mkinitrd.conf. I've a pretty common Asus K8V-X motherboard which SATA ctrler requires at least scsi_mod, sata_via and libata to work. Booting with the current kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64-generic image works fine. I'm happy i kept my very old image before upgrading 2.6.11!! -Pascal -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-11-amd64-generic Locale: LANG=fr_CA, LC_CTYPE=fr_CA (charmap=ISO-8859-1) -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: winbind 3.0.14a-4 (sarge) breaks samba ADS member server
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 312513 important Bug#312513: winbind 3.0.14a-4 (sarge) breaks samba ADS member server Severity set to `important'. tags 312513 unreproducible moreinfo Bug#312513: winbind 3.0.14a-4 (sarge) breaks samba ADS member server There were no tags set. Tags added: unreproducible, moreinfo thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: tagging 315955
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 # fixed in CVS tags 315955 pending Bug#315955: samba package build fails; DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM is 'linux-gnu' now There were no tags set. Tags added: pending End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#312513: winbind 3.0.14a-4 (sarge) breaks samba ADS member server
severity 312513 important tags 312513 unreproducible moreinfo thanks Downgrading, since no one else is reporting this problem with 3.0.14a. Stephen, does using the posted testparm output as an smb.conf (munged appropriately for your domain values) get you anywhere with trying to reproduce this bug? -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316479: clusterssh: cssh does not start and complains about X11/Protocol.pm
Package: clusterssh Version: 3.17.1-1 Severity: grave When I try to run cssh, I get the following error: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cssh lb Can't read: at /usr/share/perl5/X11/Protocol.pm line 2301 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ Here's my ~/.csshrc : #terminal = aterm terminal = uxterm terminal_options = always_tile = yes cx_args = -Ct lb1.jexiste.org ssh clusters = web sql lb mail shell ns shell test nfs # backup web = web1 web2 web3 web4 web5 web6 web7 web8 web9 web10 web11 web12 web13 web14 web15 web16 web17 web18 sql = sqla1 sqlb1 sqla2 sqlb2 sqla3 sqlb3 sqla4 sqlb4 lb = lb1 lb2 mail = mail1 mail2 shell = shell1 shell2 ns = ns1 ns2 nfs = nfsa1 nfsa2 nfsb2 nfsa3 nfsb3 nfsa4 nfsb4 -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-386 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages clusterssh depends on: ii aterm [x-terminal-emulat 0.4.2-11Afterstep XVT - a VT102 emulator f ii eterm [x-terminal-emulat 0.9.2-8 Enlightened Terminal Emulator ii gnome-terminal [x-termin 2.10.0-2The GNOME 2 terminal emulator appl ii libx11-protocol-perl 0.53-2 Perl module for the X Window Syste ii openssh-client 1:4.1p1-4 Secure shell client, an rlogin/rsh ii perl-tk 1:800.025-2 Perl module providing the Tk graph ii xterm [x-terminal-emulat 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14 X terminal emulator clusterssh recommends no packages. -- no debconf information -- Cyril Bouthors pgpEV7qDA4iEk.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#314374: SquirrelMail cross site scripting vulnerabilities [CAN-2005-1769]
Hello, Update: A new vulnerability has been discovered in squirrelmail. We'll release one advisory for this one and the new one (to be announced soon). Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: tagging 316479
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 tags 316479 sid Bug#316479: clusterssh: cssh does not start and complains about X11/Protocol.pm There were no tags set. Tags added: sid End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Thanks for fixing my mess. I wasn't sure if the kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic one was going to reach anyone since bugs.debian.org was showing unknown maintainer. And kernel-source-2.6.11-amd64-generic was a mistake. Sorry about that, won't happen again. -Pascal On 7/1/05, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: reassign 316476 kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic merge 316476 316453 thanks On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:10:04AM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Package: kernel-source-2.6.11 Version: 2.6.11-4 Severity: critical Justification: breaks the whole system (Sorry if this is a dupe, i had filled it against kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic). Well, given that you filed three bugs all about the same issue, yes, two of them would seem to be duplicates. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer BodyID:43972286.2.n.logpart (stored separately) -- Projet MoviXMaker (http://sv.gnu.org/projects/movixmaker) Projet [e]MoviX[2] (http://movix.sf.net) Debian Project (http://www.debian.org) TuxKart (Wiki (GOTM): http://netpanzer.berlios.de/tuxkart/index.php)
Bug#267527: a2ps: version 4.13b-4.3 tries to print using lpr -d, which does not work with the lpr package
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 05:48:03PM +0200, Mohammed Adnène Trojette wrote: Indeed. To be exhaustive, one should write a command-line parser that would affect the options to lp or lpr accordingly to their respective syntax. That is what I try to do with this patch against the script, but only for the lp -d/lpr -P option, using getopt, from the essential package util-linux. It didn't work for me, because apparently here a2ps gives -d to a2ps-lpr-wrapper, instead of -P. I made a new version that accepts both: --- a2ps-lpr-wrapper2005-01-20 22:47:16.0 +0100 +++ a2ps-lpr-wrapper.fg 2005-07-01 11:27:29.0 +0200 @@ -1,12 +1,30 @@ -#!/bin/sh +#!/bin/bash # # a2ps-lpr-wrapper - lp/lpr wrapper script for GNU a2ps on Debian # +TEMP=`getopt -o d: -n 'a2ps-lpr-wrapper' -- $@` +PRINTER= + +if [ $? != 0 ] ; then echo Terminating... 2 ; exit 1 ; fi + +# Note the quotes around `$TEMP': they are essential! +eval set -- $TEMP + +while true ; do + case $1 in + -d) PRINTER=$2; shift 2; break ;; + -P) PRINTER=$2; shift 2; break ;; + *) echo usage: a2ps-lpr-wrapper -P [printer] [files] ; exit 1 ;; + esac +done + # If /usr/bin/lp (from cupsys-client) exists, just use it. if [ -x /usr/bin/lp ]; then - /usr/bin/lp $* + if [ x$PRINTER != x ]; then d=-d $PRINTER; else d=; fi + /usr/bin/lp $d $@ else # In case /usr/bin/lp is not available, then fall back /usr/bin/lpr. - /usr/bin/lpr $* + if [ x$PRINTER != x ]; then P=-P $PRINTER; else P=; fi + /usr/bin/lpr $P $@ fi -- Frank Gevaerts [EMAIL PROTECTED] fks bvba - Formal and Knowledge Systemshttp://www.fks.be/ Stationsstraat 108 Tel: ++32-(0)11-21 49 11 B-3570 ALKEN Fax: ++32-(0)11-22 04 19
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Package: debian-installer-manual Severity: serious Justification: Policy 2.3 Section C.4 of the Debian GNU/Linux Installation Guide is based on notes I wrote for performing a chroot installation of Debian under an existing GNU/Linux system. The current version of the manual has modified this work, but is still clearly based on the documents I wrote originally in 1999, and further ammended in 2002 and continue to maintain, with most recent modifications in May, 2004: http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/install-under-chroot.html http://kmself.home.netcom.com/GNU/Linux/FAQs/DebianChrootInstall.html http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/DebianChrootInstall The terms for distribution of my work is clearly stated: © 2002-2004 Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) This document may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, this notice, and the following disclaimer: THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. The Debian Project has been distributing this work in violation of my copyrights. I've previously requested this be remedied in 2003, the situation remains uncorrected: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00489.html The use of my works has been confirmed by one of the debian-installer-manual developers: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00491.html My distribution terms *are* DFSG free. I'm merely requesting that credit for my contributions be given. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (950, 'testing'), (400, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: reassign 316476 to kernel-image-2.6.11-9-amd64-generic
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 reassign 316476 kernel-image-2.6.11-9-amd64-generic Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' Bug#316453: kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4 Warning: Unknown package 'kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' Bug reassigned from package `kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic' to `kernel-image-2.6.11-9-amd64-generic'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316509: calamaris break at loading calamaris::calBars3d
Package: calamaris
Version: 2.99.1.3-1
Severity: grave
Justification: renders package unusable
1)
calamaris does not work any more. It ends with the message: Couldn't load
package calamaris::calBars3d, maybe it is not installed: No such file or
directory (invoked via /etc/cron.daily/calamaris).
/usr/share/perl5/calamaris/calBars3d.pm is in fact existing.
`bash -x /etc/cron.daily/calamaris` ends with:
+ case $DAYDO in
+ cat /var/log/squid/access.log
+ nice -39 /usr/bin/calamaris -a -f auto --config-file
/etc/calamaris/calamaris.conf -o forweekly.5 -F html,graph -H 'Squid on Guinan
- Daily' --output-path /var/www/calamaris --output-file daily.html
/usr/bin/calamaris: Couldn't load package calamaris::calBars3d,
maybe it is not installed: No such file or directory
$ perl -e 'foreach (@INC) {print $_\n;}'
/etc/perl
/usr/local/lib/perl/5.8.7
/usr/local/share/perl/5.8.7
/usr/lib/perl5
/usr/share/perl5
/usr/lib/perl/5.8
/usr/share/perl/5.8
/usr/local/lib/site_perl
.
2)
Taking out ,graph from /etc/cron.daily/calamaris temporarily fixes the
problem.
Feel free to contact me for any other information that might be helpful.
gregor
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (10, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.12.1.200506242037
Locale: LANG=C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15)
Versions of packages calamaris depends on:
ii bc1.06-17The GNU bc arbitrary precision cal
ii debconf 1.4.51 Debian configuration management sy
ii perl [perl5] 5.8.7-3Larry Wall's Practical Extraction
-- debconf information:
* calamaris/monthly/title: Squid on Guinan Monthly
* calamaris/daily/html: /var/www/calamaris/daily.html
calamaris/weekly/mail: root
* calamaris/weekly/title: Squid on Guinan - Weekly
* calamaris/weekly/html: /var/www/calamaris/weekly.html
* calamaris/daily/title: Squid on Guinan - Daily
* calamaris/daily/task: web
* calamaris/transition:
* calamaris/weekly/task: web
calamaris/monthly/mail: root
calamaris/daily/mail: root
* calamaris/monthly/task: web
* calamaris/cache_type: squid
* calamaris/monthly/html: /var/www/calamaris/monthly.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316479: clusterssh: cssh does not start and complains about X11/Protocol.pm
Thanks for the bug report; I'm still trying to reproduce this on my system. Here are a couple of notes: * uxterm backgrounds itself after opening the terminal window, and hence is not going to work with clusterssh at this time. I don't think it's ever worked, and this is noted in the README.Debian file. I'll make the note more prominent in the next release. * aterm has a problem with the -xrm switch that cssh is tacking on. This is a separate bug, and I will address it. * cx_args is no longer used by the script * You have the cluster shell listed twice in your clusters line. This isn't related to the bug, but I'll have to do some testing to see if might cause other problems. I'm curious to know if your problem began with the 3.17.1 version. Could you attempt your cssh with terminal = xterm just to validate that the script still works for you with configuration? Cheers, tony Cyril Bouthors wrote: Package: clusterssh Version: 3.17.1-1 Severity: grave When I try to run cssh, I get the following error: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cssh lb Can't read: at /usr/share/perl5/X11/Protocol.pm line 2301 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ Here's my ~/.csshrc : #terminal = aterm terminal = uxterm terminal_options = always_tile = yes cx_args = -Ct lb1.jexiste.org ssh clusters = web sql lb mail shell ns shell test nfs # backup web = web1 web2 web3 web4 web5 web6 web7 web8 web9 web10 web11 web12 web13 web14 web15 web16 web17 web18 sql = sqla1 sqlb1 sqla2 sqlb2 sqla3 sqlb3 sqla4 sqlb4 lb = lb1 lb2 mail = mail1 mail2 shell = shell1 shell2 ns = ns1 ns2 nfs = nfsa1 nfsa2 nfsb2 nfsa3 nfsb3 nfsa4 nfsb4 -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-386 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages clusterssh depends on: ii aterm [x-terminal-emulat 0.4.2-11Afterstep XVT - a VT102 emulator f ii eterm [x-terminal-emulat 0.9.2-8 Enlightened Terminal Emulator ii gnome-terminal [x-termin 2.10.0-2The GNOME 2 terminal emulator appl ii libx11-protocol-perl 0.53-2 Perl module for the X Window Syste ii openssh-client 1:4.1p1-4 Secure shell client, an rlogin/rsh ii perl-tk 1:800.025-2 Perl module providing the Tk graph ii xterm [x-terminal-emulat 4.3.0.dfsg.1-14 X terminal emulator clusterssh recommends no packages. -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#310757: This is CAN-2005-1774
Hi! This vulnerability has been assigned CAN-2005-1774, please mention that in the changelog. Thanks! Martin -- Martin Pitthttp://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com Debian Developer http://www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Karsten M. Self wrote: Section C.4 of the Debian GNU/Linux Installation Guide is based on notes I wrote for performing a chroot installation of Debian under an existing GNU/Linux system. The current version of the manual has modified this work, but is still clearly based on the documents I wrote originally in 1999, and further ammended in 2002 and continue to maintain, with most recent modifications in May, 2004: http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/install-under-chroot.html http://kmself.home.netcom.com/GNU/Linux/FAQs/DebianChrootInstall.html http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/DebianChrootInstall The terms for distribution of my work is clearly stated: © 2002-2004 Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) This document may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, this notice, and the following disclaimer: THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. I don't feel it would be healthy for the readability (or usability) of the manual if the copyright notice included a list of every minor contributor or web page read by a contributor, or if it had a copyright statement more complex than the current one: Copyright © 2004, 2005 the Debian Installer team This manual is free software; you may redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License. Please refer to the license in Appendix E, GNU General Public License. FWIW, I think you're blowing this all out of porportion, but if you would like to produce a list of specific phrases in the manual that you feel are derived from those on your web page, I'd be happy to rewrite them. Aside from that, we can add a link to one of your pages in our existing list of influential howtos and faqs, something like: Extremely helpful text and information was found in Jim Mintha's HOWTO for network booting (no URL available), the ulink + url=url-debianchrootinstall;DebianChrootInstall document/a, the ulink url=url-debian-faq;Debian FAQ/ulink, the ulink url=url-m68k-faq;Linux/m68k FAQ/ulink, the ulink url=url-sparc-linux-faq;Linux for SPARC Processors FAQ/ulink, the ulink url=url-alpha-faq;Linux/Alpha FAQ/ulink, amongst others. The maintainers of these freely available and rich sources of information must be recognized. The Debian Project has been distributing this work in violation of my copyrights. I've previously requested this be remedied in 2003, the situation remains uncorrected: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00489.html The use of my works has been confirmed by one of the debian-installer-manual developers: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00491.html I'm sorry that this has gone uncorrected for so long. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Hello, On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:10:04AM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Since kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic 2.6.11-4, the kernel-image won't boot. The first error message says something like: Can't load shared object file libc.so.6 The second error message says it can't find sda1. Do you have the initrd in place, and is it linked correctly in the bootloader? My hypothesis is that the necessary modules for my onboard SATA controller are no longer included in the initrd image. I HAVEN'T modified /etc/mkinitrd/mkinitrd.conf. I've a pretty common Asus K8V-X motherboard which SATA ctrler requires at least scsi_mod, sata_via and libata to work. what do you have listed in your /etc/mkinitrd/modules? Booting with the current kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64-generic image works fine. I'm happy i kept my very old image before upgrading 2.6.11!! the amd64-generic kernel is intended for the installer, you should run install 2.6.11-9-amd64-k8 instead, but this is another issue. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316538: gimp FTBFS: bogus explicit build-dep on slang1-dev
Package: gimp Version: 2.2.7-1 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source gimp explicitly build-depends on slang1-dev, even though its only use of slang is indirect, via aalib. Now that aalib has migrated to slang 2, whose development package conflicts with slang 1's, gimp can no longer simultaneously satisfy both build-dependencies. As such, please drop the build-dependency on slang1-dev, which was never necessary and is now actively problematic. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316542: gimp: FTBFS: Still uses slang1-dev.
Package: gimp Version: 2.2.8-1 Severity: serious Hi, Your package currently fails to build because you have conflicting build dependencies: You build depend on slang1-dev and aalib1-dev. aalib1-dev itself has a dependency on libslang2-dev, which of course conflicts with slang1-dev. Please change your build dependency from slang1-dev to libslang2-dev. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: postinstall kill running klogd
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: priority 284914 grave Bug#284914: postinstall kill running klogd Severity set to `grave'. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Hi Frederik, i've just tried kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-k8 with the exact same result... On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:10:04AM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Since kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-generic 2.6.11-4, the kernel-image won't boot. The first error message says something like: Can't load shared object file libc.so.6 The second error message says it can't find sda1. Do you have the initrd in place, and is it linked correctly in the bootloader? i'm using grub and my /boot/grub/menu.lst shows that yes, it finds it: title Debian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.11-9-amd64-k8 Default root(hd0,0) kernel /boot/vmlinuz root=/dev/sda1 ro console=tty0 initrd /boot/initrd.img savedefault boot [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/recover$ ls -l /boot/initrd.img* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 2005-06-30 19:39 /boot/initrd.img - initrd.img-2.6.11-9-amd64-k8 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4694016 2005-06-29 23:42 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.11-9-amd64-generic -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4730880 2005-06-30 19:39 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.11-9-amd64-k8 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4182016 2005-06-19 03:53 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.8-11-amd64-generic lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 33 2005-06-19 14:07 /boot/initrd.img.old - initrd.img-2.6.11-9-amd64-generic My hypothesis is that the necessary modules for my onboard SATA controller are no longer included in the initrd image. I HAVEN'T modified /etc/mkinitrd/mkinitrd.conf. I've a pretty common Asus K8V-X motherboard which SATA ctrler requires at least scsi_mod, sata_via and libata to work. what do you have listed in your /etc/mkinitrd/modules? it's empty... (well there are commented-out lines). so i should use that file to specify my needed modules since mkinitrd can't auto-detect them anymore? Booting with the current kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64-generic image works fine. I'm happy i kept my very old image before upgrading 2.6.11!! the amd64-generic kernel is intended for the installer, you should run install 2.6.11-9-amd64-k8 instead, but this is another issue. thanks for your help, -Pascal -- XBGM# (http://xbgm.sf.net) MoviXMaker-2 (http://sv.gnu.org/projects/movixmaker) [e]MoviX[2] (http://movix.sf.net) Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)
Bug#316479: clusterssh: cssh does not start and complains about X11/Protocol.pm
Correction to my previous response: uxterm doesn't background itself, it simply calls the first xterm in the path and not /usr/X11R6/bin/xterm explicitly. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Hello, On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 01:02:19PM -0400, Pascal Giard wrote: Hi Frederik, i've just tried kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-k8 with the exact same result... This is interesting. You have latest initrd-utils installed, and your system is up to date? can you please send your mkinitrd.conf? menu.lst looks good, do the root devices match? Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Joey, please hear me out. Debian needs to fix this, and your response to Karsten isn't sufficient or appropriate. First, Karsten has a reasonable moral claim on Debian for an author acknowledgement: Compare his Debian Chroot Install notes, which _were_ the first generally available clear explanation of that matter on the Web, and you will see for yourself: A lot of the wording is taken _absolutely verbatim_ from Karsten's page -- and, as Karsten points out, Chris Tillman is on record as acknowledging the debt. Second, if you insist on correcting the problem the other way (by making the manual no longer be a derivative work of Karsten's pioneering page), then it is NOT appropriate to make corrective action conditional on Karsten producing a list of specific phrases in the manual for you to rewrite. That's not his job. He's pointed out that Debian is wrongfully using his creation in violation of its licence: It's Debian's job to do everything else necessary to fix the problem. I urge you to take the other type of corrective action: Do the right thing, and credit Karsten as author of a document on which the manual is based, as he requested. If for whatever reason you can't see the logic of that, however, you _cannot_ throw back onto Karsten the task of listing for you all the bits of wording that were borrowed. It's not right, and very obviously not his problem. I'm disappointed -- as an author and as a Debian user. This is no way to treat a generous volunteer. -- Cheers,My pid is Inigo Montoya. You kill -9 Rick Moen my parent process. Prepare to vi. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
debian-legal and DPL added to distribution. This bug concerns appropriate copyright notice in the Debian Installer Guide which adapts substantial material originally written by me. My license allows use under DFSG compliant guidelines, but requests attribution. I initially requested attribution in May, 2003, a DIG author admitted to using my work in writing this section of the DIG, but requested I submit a patch (I'm not familiar with Debian's document system and patches -- I'm not a DD). Joey Hess is now proposing a rewrite to excise any citation of my materials which is unacceptable as: - The woody DIG already cites my work and is now obsolete stable. - I would prefer attribution to excision. - Denying contributors proper credit reflects poorly on the Debian Project and discourages future contributions to Debian documentation by third parties, a contribution by which the Project would benefit greatly. on Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:56:32AM -0400, Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Karsten M. Self wrote: Section C.4 of the Debian GNU/Linux Installation Guide is based on notes I wrote for performing a chroot installation of Debian under an existing GNU/Linux system. The current version of the manual has modified this work, but is still clearly based on the documents I wrote originally in 1999, and further ammended in 2002 and continue to maintain, with most recent modifications in May, 2004: http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/install-under-chroot.html http://kmself.home.netcom.com/Linux/FAQs/DebianChrootInstall.html http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/DebianChrootInstall The terms for distribution of my work is clearly stated: ? 2002-2004 Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) This document may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, this notice, and the following disclaimer: THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. I don't feel it would be healthy for the readability (or usability) of the manual if the copyright notice included a list of every minor contributor or web page read by a contributor, or if it had a copyright statement more complex than the current one: An entire section of the Debian Installer Guide (DIG) substantially running to approximately four printed pages adapted and consolidated from my longer work of approximately ten printed pages is not what I'd consider a minor contribution. I'm more than dismayed that the Debian project which places such an emphasis on scrupulously adhering to software licensing requirements has been dragging its feet for over two years and repeated requests to rectify this situation, and it's now suggested that a rewrite to excise any of my content would be preferable to simply giving credit where due, as repeatedly requested. I've written and adapted my documents for over five years. I've made the work freely available, with copyright notice and attribution. My own notes are the first Google result for debian chroot install (the second, ironically, is my original request to be credited in the DIG). For my own part, I'm both proud of my contribution and glad it's been adopted as part of official Debian Project documentation. I perform professional duties as as systems and network administrator, tech writer, and trainer. What I'd like is to be able to point to this as an example of my work. The current situation does not allow me to do this. I'm more than happy for the Debian Project to use the work. I expect credit as detailed in my copyright notice. The DIG has been adapted somewhat from the woody edition, which appeared in section 3.7, which was closer to my original, but is still clearly a derived work. I'll include a summary of major similar sections below, but note: - The major difference is that the DIG and my original method is substitution of debootstrap for the use of the potato 2.2 base tgz image. - Specific examples, including the partition table example and others, are adapted straight out of my work, with minimal changes. - The general process mirrors the procedures I spelled out. There are some changes (mostly improvements ;-) Copyright ? 2004, 2005 the Debian Installer team This manual is free software; you may redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License. Please refer to the license in Appendix E, GNU General Public License. The GPL v2 section one states that a work my be copied and distributed if: you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice. ...of which the notice I've written is compatible with the GPL. The GPL's disclaimer of warranty suits my needs. FWIW, I
Bug#316538: gimp FTBFS: bogus explicit build-dep on slang1-dev
merge 316538 316542 thanks They're obviously the same problem, merging. And I'd agree, if it doesn't use slang directly, don't build depend on it. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: gimp FTBFS: bogus explicit build-dep on slang1-dev
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: merge 316538 316542 Bug#316538: gimp FTBFS: bogus explicit build-dep on slang1-dev Bug#316542: gimp: FTBFS: Still uses slang1-dev. Merged 316538 316542. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
Hi Frederik, i've just tried kernel-image-2.6.11-amd64-k8 with the exact same result... This is interesting. You have latest initrd-utils installed, and your system is up to date? i've initrd-tools 0.1.81.1 ... the latest according to packages.debian.org. can you please send your mkinitrd.conf? sure! i attached it. Could my problem be caused by ROOT=probe that fails detecting the needed modules? That would be strange as it used to work... menu.lst looks good, do the root devices match? yes... and 2.6.8 working confirms this. (also, i only have one SATA drive) i've just tried with a /etc/mkinitrd/modules that contains: ext3 sata_via scsi_mod sd_mod libata without success same error as before (shared object not found libc.so.6). i regenerated the initrd.img by dpkg -P kernel apt-get install kernel. -Pascal -- XBGM# (http://xbgm.sf.net) MoviXMaker-2 (http://sv.gnu.org/projects/movixmaker) [e]MoviX[2] (http://movix.sf.net) Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org) mkinitrd.conf Description: Binary data
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Rick Moen wrote: I'm disappointed -- as an author and as a Debian user. This is no way to treat a generous volunteer. I'm afraid you've misconstrued my email, but since it was directed as Karsten, I'm not going to bother to expand on it unless he misunderstands it too. I prefer to write fewer words on this topic than I could write to just fix the issue in the manual. Sorry. PS, You also seem to have misconstrused Karsen's request, since he is not only asking to be credited, but to have the license of the manual changed to include the one he (apparently) made up for his document. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
IANAL, IANADD, but it's hard for me to imagine that there is any sensible or just way to resolve this other than to credit Karsten with a significant contribution to the Guide. Such a guide is of course largely factual and could bear many resemblances to Karsten's without constituting plagiarism or a violation of his copyright; but he presents strong evidence that the way this guide actually was written involved copying and adapting portions of his creative expression. Plagiarism would, I think, be too strong a word, and he is something less than a co-author of the Guide; but it seems reasonable for him to ask for some acknowledgment. Cheers, - Michael
Processed: tagging 316519
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 tags 316519 sid Bug#316519: libpostgis1-pg74: uninstallable There were no tags set. Tags added: sid End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: And sarge?
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reopen 316362 Bug#316362: security problem with drupal Bug reopened, originator not changed. tags 316362 + sarge, security Bug#316362: security problem with drupal There were no tags set. Tags added: sarge, security thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Karsten M. Self wrote: debian-legal and DPL added to distribution. I'm afraid that by escalating this unnecessarily, as well as resorting to certian rhetoric (for which I cannot be bothered to do a point-by-point rebuttal), you've convinced me it's best I bow out of the discussion, permantly. There are about 200 other d-i contributors who can commit some fix or the other for this. I hope that they keep license compatability and the general badness of ad-hoc licenses in mind when doing so. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316362: And sarge?
reopen 316362 tags 316362 + sarge, security thanks Please keep this bug open until an DSA has been released. -- Dr. Helge Kreutzmann, Dipl.-Phys. [EMAIL PROTECTED] gpg signed mail preferred 64bit GNU powered http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/~kreutzm Help keep free software libre: http://www.ffii.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Dropped [EMAIL PROTECTED] What the hell were you thinking? Throwing a tantrum and screaming at every email address you can find doesn't make your argument more valid (on the contrary, it suggests that you don't have much of an argument at all). On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: Joey Hess is now proposing a rewrite to excise any citation of my materials which is unacceptable as: - The woody DIG already cites my work and is now obsolete stable. A past error does not prohibit the maintainer from excising any part of the work, at his discretion. You don't get to say you made a mistake in the past, so you're not allowed to remove my work now. - I would prefer attribution to excision. Being DFSG-free is a prerequisite for being in Debian, but being DFSG- free does not compel Debian to include a work. Your preferences don't make excision of a work unacceptable. - Denying contributors proper credit reflects poorly on the Debian Project and discourages future contributions to Debian documentation by third parties, a contribution by which the Project would benefit greatly. If your work is excised, then there is no contribution which is being denied attribution. It's saying please offer contributions under the same license as the rest of the work, which is a legitimate, useful, and common thing to require. The reasons you have cited are reasons why *you* don't want your work excised, not reasons why it is unacceptable for Debian to do so. I don't know how you can confuse the two. The fact that you're trying to coerce a maintainer to include a work instead of attempting to address his reasons for doing so, is enough for me to agree with Joey's decision. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316362: acknowledged by developer (Bug#316362: fixed in drupal 4.5.4-1)
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report #316362: security problem with drupal, which was filed against the drupal package. It has been closed by one of the developers, namely Hilko Bengen [EMAIL PROTECTED]. Their explanation is attached below. If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate message then please contact the developer, by replying to this email. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) Received: (at 316362-close) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2005 16:08:05 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jul 01 09:08:05 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoO3g-0006Tk-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 09:08:05 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoNyF-0001pM-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:02:27 -0400 From: Hilko Bengen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $ Subject: Bug#316362: fixed in drupal 4.5.4-1 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:02:27 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Source: drupal Source-Version: 4.5.4-1 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of drupal, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive: drupal_4.5.4-1.diff.gz to pool/main/d/drupal/drupal_4.5.4-1.diff.gz drupal_4.5.4-1.dsc to pool/main/d/drupal/drupal_4.5.4-1.dsc drupal_4.5.4-1_all.deb to pool/main/d/drupal/drupal_4.5.4-1_all.deb drupal_4.5.4.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/d/drupal/drupal_4.5.4.orig.tar.gz Hmm, where fix in stable? I think you can`t upload new version in sarge. Maybe need contact with Security Team? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
on Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:16:29PM -0400, Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Karsten M. Self wrote: debian-legal and DPL added to distribution. I'm afraid that by escalating this unnecessarily, as well as resorting to certian rhetoric (for which I cannot be bothered to do a point-by-point rebuttal), you've convinced me it's best I bow out of the discussion, permantly. There are about 200 other d-i contributors who can commit some fix or the other for this. I hope that they keep license compatability and the general badness of ad-hoc licenses in mind when doing so. I'm more than happy to license compatibly to any specified DFSG license, including GPL, for use here. I am the original author, that's my prerogative. My issue isn't specific licensing terms. It's not use. It's attribution. GPL licensing, e.g., with attribution, would be satisfactorially. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? Jeff Waugh: Can't see the trees for the trees... - http://zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/2004-January/008588.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
on Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:34:54PM -0400, Glenn Maynard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Dropped [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fair enough for now. What the hell were you thinking? That after three years of trying to get appropriate credit I might as well take this to the top. Throwing a tantrum and screaming at every email address you can find doesn't make your argument more valid (on the contrary, it suggests that you don't have much of an argument at all). And saying that suggests you haven't looked over the evidence I've presented, including extensive quotations of my documents in the DIG. If this was your work, and your goal was portions of section C4 originally written and copyrighted by Karsten M. Self, this contribution was acknowledged by package maintainers / authors, and you'd been trying to get said credit for three years, you might have a similar level of frustration. The Debian Project is doing the wrong thing. Nothing you've said changes that. On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: Joey Hess is now proposing a rewrite to excise any citation of my materials which is unacceptable as: - The woody DIG already cites my work and is now obsolete stable. A past error does not prohibit the maintainer from excising any part of the work, at his discretion. You don't get to say you made a mistake in the past, so you're not allowed to remove my work now. This is an area I'd prefer not to go into, but you're mistaken. - I would prefer attribution to excision. Being DFSG-free is a prerequisite for being in Debian, but being DFSG- free does not compel Debian to include a work. Your preferences don't make excision of a work unacceptable. Debian are already including the work, in violation of its stated licensing terms. - Denying contributors proper credit reflects poorly on the Debian Project and discourages future contributions to Debian documentation by third parties, a contribution by which the Project would benefit greatly. If your work is excised, then there is no contribution which is being denied attribution. There is the existing Woody documentation. It's saying please offer contributions under the same license as the rest of the work, which is a legitimate, useful, and common thing to require. I wrote a work which was appropriated, without my knowledge, without my authorization, and absent any request on my part, in conflict with the licensing terms I'd specified. I wrote a work which is free to be used, quoted, copied, modified, and distributed. With attribution and a short copyright notice. If you have any specific DFSG issues with: ? 2002-2004 Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) This document may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, this notice, and the following disclaimer: THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. The disclaimer itself is a largely a subset of the BSD disclaimer, noted: THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. As I've indicated: if it's licensing that's a hang-up, I'm more than happy to license the work under an established DFSG license. Given that the existing work is under GPL, this would be suitable. My own terms are intended as broader than, but compatible with, the GPL. The reasons you have cited are reasons why *you* don't want your work excised, not reasons why it is unacceptable for Debian to do so. I don't know how you can confuse the two. I'm saying that excising the work would be unacceptable in light of past copyright violations. The fact that you're trying to coerce a maintainer to include a work No, the work has already been included. It was included without coercion. What I'm requesting is credit for work included. instead of attempting to address his reasons for doing so, is enough for me to agree with Joey's decision. I believe you misunderstand the situation. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of
Bug#316476: kernel-source-2.6.11: Fails to boot since 2.6.11-4
I was beginning to doubt that this was actually related to a change in kernel-source so i tried going back to 2.6.11-3. And it fails just like the others!? So it seems it's something else that broke it and the kernel-image package update just trigerred the problem... Could this be related to libc6¹ ?! I doubt it as the changelog doesn't show any change since may 10th (just before i actually bought my current amd64). When looking at the content of the initrd.img-2.6.11* i noticed that there wasn't any lib/libc.so.6 but there's a lib64/libc.so.6... Perhaps it could not find it! So i looked into initrd.img-2.6.8-amd64-generic and noticed that lib/libc.so.6 existed and there wasn't any lib64/libc.so.6. Ah ah, gotcha! Any idea what's the root cause? How can i fix this cleanly? -Pascal -- XBGM# (http://xbgm.sf.net) MoviXMaker-2 (http://sv.gnu.org/projects/movixmaker) [e]MoviX[2] (http://movix.sf.net) Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:34:54PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote: The fact that you're trying to coerce a maintainer to include a work instead of attempting to address his reasons for doing so, is enough for me to agree with Joey's decision. That doesn't actually seem to me to be what he's doing. Rather, the DIG maintainer saw his HOWTO, liked it, and incorporated it in the install guide. There's a major difference. -- The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely one bananosecond -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#314289: experiencing the same issue
I'm experiencing the same issue with this package. Here's an strace -f of
the sshd process, starting after I typed my password (password removed).
Process 5023 attached - interrupt to quit
read(6, \0\0\0\21, 4) = 4
read(6, 4\0\0\0\1\0\0\0\10, 17) = 17
write(7, \0\0\0\r\6, 5) = 5
write(7, \0\0\0\10, 12) = 12
--- SIGCHLD (Child exited) @ 0 (0) ---
rt_sigaction(SIGCHLD, NULL, {0x8064a10, [], 0}, 8) = 0
rt_sigaction(SIGCHLD, {SIG_DFL}, NULL, 8) = 0
waitpid(5027, [{WIFEXITED(s) WEXITSTATUS(s) == 0}], WNOHANG) = 5027
sigreturn() = ? (mask now [])
write(6, \0\0\0\0055, 5) = 5
write(6, \0\0\0\1, 4) = 4
read(6, \0\0\0\1, 4) = 4
read(6, 2, 1) = 1
read(7, \0\0\0\27, 4) = 4
read(7, \0\0\0\0\2OK\0\0\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0, 23) = 23
write(6, \0\0\0\0213, 5) = 5
write(6, \0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0, 16) = 16
read(6, \0\0\0\5, 4) = 4
read(6, 4\0\0\0\0, 5) = 5
write(6, \0\0\0\0055, 5) = 5
write(6, \0\0\0\0, 4) = 4
read(6, \0\0\0\1, 4) = 4
read(6, 6, 1) = 1
rt_sigaction(SIGCHLD, NULL, {SIG_DFL}, 8) = 0
kill(5027, SIGTERM) = -1 ESRCH (No such process)
close(7)= 0
close(8)= 0
write(6, \0\0\0\0017, 5) = 5
read(6, \0\0\0\1, 4) = 4
read(6, ., 1) = 1
write(6, \0\0\0\t/, 5)= 5
write(6, \0\0\0\1\0\0\0\0, 8) = 8
--- SIGCHLD (Child exited) @ 0 (0) ---
time([1120254395]) = 1120254395
getpid()= 5023
rt_sigaction(SIGPIPE, {0xb7de4a70, [], 0}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0
send(4, 38Jul 1 14:46:35 sshd[5023]: ..., 111, 0) = 111
rt_sigaction(SIGPIPE, {SIG_IGN}, NULL, 8) = 0
close(4)= 0
read(6, \0\0\4\207, 4)= 4
read(6, [EMAIL PROTECTED]\267\274\362M.|RX\0\0..., 1159) = 1159
close(6)= 0
mmap2(NULL, 1310720, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) =
0xb7a34000
munmap(0xb7fd9000, 65536) = 0
waitpid(5024, [{WIFEXITED(s) WEXITSTATUS(s) == 0}], 0) = 5024
alarm(0)= 570
close(5)= 0
socketpair(PF_FILE, SOCK_STREAM, 0, [4, 5]) = 0
fcntl64(4, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
fcntl64(5, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
clone(Process 5029 attached
child_stack=0, flags=CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID|CLONE_CHILD_SETTID|SIGCHLD,
child_tidptr=0xb7d0f648) = 5029
[pid 5023] close(4)= 0
[pid 5023] rt_sigaction(SIGHUP, NULL, {SIG_DFL}, 8) = 0
[pid 5023] rt_sigaction(SIGHUP, {0x805e2c0, [], 0}, NULL, 8) = 0
[pid 5023] rt_sigaction(SIGTERM, NULL, {SIG_DFL}, 8) = 0
[pid 5023] rt_sigaction(SIGTERM, {0x805e2c0, [], 0}, NULL, 8) = 0
[pid 5023] read(5, unfinished ...
[pid 5029] close(5)= 0
[pid 5029] getuid32() = 0
[pid 5029] setgid32(1000) = 0
[pid 5029] open(/etc/group, O_RDONLY) = 5
[pid 5029] fcntl64(5, F_GETFD) = 0
[pid 5029] fcntl64(5, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
[pid 5029] _llseek(5, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR) = 0
[pid 5029] fstat64(5, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=777, ...}) = 0
[pid 5029] mmap2(NULL, 777, PROT_READ, MAP_SHARED, 5, 0) = 0xb7fe8000
[pid 5029] _llseek(5, 777, [777], SEEK_SET) = 0
[pid 5029] fstat64(5, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=777, ...}) = 0
[pid 5029] munmap(0xb7fe8000, 777) = 0
[pid 5029] close(5)= 0
[pid 5029] setgroups32(9, [1000, 4, 6, 20, 24, 25, 29, 40, 44]) = 0
[pid 5029] getuid32() = 0
[pid 5029] getuid32() = 0
[pid 5029] ioctl(0, SNDCTL_TMR_TIMEBASE or TCGETS, 0xbfffe954) = -1 ENOTTY
(Inappropriate ioctl for device)
[pid 5029] time([1120254395]) = 1120254395
[pid 5029] getpid()= 5029
[pid 5029] rt_sigaction(SIGPIPE, {0xb7de4a70, [], 0}, {SIG_IGN}, 8) = 0
[pid 5029] socket(PF_FILE, SOCK_DGRAM, 0) = 5
[pid 5029] fcntl64(5, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
[pid 5029] connect(5, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path=/dev/log}, 16) = 0
[pid 5029] send(5, 38Jul 1 14:46:35 sshd[5029]: ..., 86, 0) = 86
[pid 5029] rt_sigaction(SIGPIPE, {SIG_IGN}, NULL, 8) = 0
[pid 5029] open(/etc/motd, O_RDONLY) = 6
[pid 5029] fstat64(6, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=373, ...}) = 0
[pid 5029] read(6, Linux maguro.burlingame.ibm.com ..., 373) = 373
[pid 5029] close(6)= 0
[pid 5029] stat64(/var/mail/amckenna, 0xbfffeb8c) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
[pid 5029] open(/etc/passwd, O_RDONLY) = 6
[pid 5029] fcntl64(6, F_GETFD) = 0
[pid 5029] fcntl64(6, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC) = 0
[pid 5029] _llseek(6, 0, [0], SEEK_CUR) = 0
[pid 5029] fstat64(6, {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=2000, ...}) = 0
[pid 5029]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A past error does not prohibit the maintainer from excising any part of the work, at his discretion. You don't get to say you made a mistake in the past, so you're not allowed to remove my work now. Regardless of what we do in future versions, we're currently distributing material in violation of a copyright holder's license. Our choices are pretty much: a) Remove the material concerned from the installation guide in woody and sarge and get new versions uploaded to the archive. Apologise profusely. Potentially still be sued. b) Add attribution to the current version of the guide. The copyright holder has indicated that he'd let the matter drop in that case. c) Ignore the issue. We are *breaking the law*. The correct response is Oh, fuck, how can we fix this, not Stop complaining, it's against our policy to attribute people so we'll remove your material instead. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: The Debian Project has been distributing this work in violation of my copyrights. I've previously requested this be remedied in 2003, the situation remains uncorrected: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00489.html Hello Karsten, You got an answer to this email which state: Sure, I remember reading your page, among others, as I was drafting that, 11 months ago. If you feel you should be listed, please list yourself. So, did you list yourself at that time? [There is no answer from you in the archives.] Cheers, -- Bill. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: libgtk2.0-0: Gdk-WARNING **: gdk_property_get(): length value has wrapped in calculation (did you pass G_MAXLONG?)
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: severity 315083 grave Bug#315083: libgtk2.0-0: breaks mozilla-firefox on amd64 Severity set to `grave'. retitle libgtk2.0-0: breaks other software: Gdk-WARNING **: gdk_property_get(): length value has wrapped in calculation (did you pass G_MAXLONG?) Unknown command or malformed arguments to command. thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:08:24PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: Regardless of what we do in future versions, we're currently distributing material in violation of a copyright holder's license. Our choices are pretty much: a) Remove the material concerned from the installation guide in woody and sarge and get new versions uploaded to the archive. Apologise profusely. Potentially still be sued. b) Add attribution to the current version of the guide. The copyright holder has indicated that he'd let the matter drop in that case. d) Add attribution to the installation guide in woody and sarge, and remove the material concerned from the archive for the next stable release. This seems like If you remove my work from your current version, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. I hope you can understand why I don't believe that arrangement is acceptable--it's no different than if you don't give me $100, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. c) Ignore the issue. We are *breaking the law*. The correct response is Oh, fuck, how can we fix this, not Stop complaining, it's against our policy to attribute people so we'll remove your material instead. I don't see (c) happening; if it is, then Karsten's complaint was unclear (which shouldn't be surprising, given its length). Karsten is asserting that a) is doing the wrong thing, which is ridiculous. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#315955: marked as done (samba package build fails; DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM is 'linux-gnu' now)
Your message dated Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:33:04 -0400 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#315955: fixed in samba 3.0.14a-6 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 27 Jun 2005 13:40:48 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 27 06:40:48 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from silver.berlin.kkf.net (vidar) [212.63.55.77] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Dmtqy-0007jZ-00; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 06:40:48 -0700 Received: from tusk by vidar with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1Dmtqw-y9-00; Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:40:46 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Sebastian Tusk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: samba package build fails; DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM is 'linux-gnu' now X-Mailer: reportbug 3.15 Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:40:45 +0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: System User [EMAIL PROTECTED] Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: samba Version: 3.0.14a-5 Severity: important Justification: fails to build from source The build of samba from the source package fails on my machine. If I understand the problem correctly that is because 'dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM' returns 'linux-gnu'. But it seems that debian/rules:line 72 assumes that 'linux' is returned. Changing the line so that it reads 'ifeq ($(DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM),linux-gnu)' fixes the problem. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (600, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.4.21-4-686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages samba depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2. 1.4.51 Debian configuration management sy ii libacl1 2.2.29-1.0.1 Access control list shared library ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libcomerr2 1.37+1.38-WIP-0620-1 common error description library ii libcupsys2 1.1.23-10Common UNIX Printing System(tm) - ii libgnutls7 0.8.12-7 GNU TLS library - runtime library ii libkrb531.3.6-3 MIT Kerberos runtime libraries ii libldap22.1.30-10OpenLDAP libraries ii libpam-modules 0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules f ii libpam-runtime 0.76-22 Runtime support for the PAM librar ii libpam0g0.76-22 Pluggable Authentication Modules l ii libpopt01.7-5lib for parsing cmdline parameters ii logrotate 3.7-5Log rotation utility ii netbase 4.21 Basic TCP/IP networking system hi samba-common3.0.2a-1 Samba common files used by both th samba recommends no packages. -- debconf information excluded --- Received: (at 315955-close) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2005 22:40:06 + From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jul 01 15:40:06 2005 Return-path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoUB4-0006Yc-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 15:40:06 -0700 Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoU4G-0007bJ-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:33:04 -0400 From: Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $ Subject: Bug#315955: fixed in samba 3.0.14a-6 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Archive Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:33:04 -0400 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Source: samba Source-Version: 3.0.14a-6 We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of samba, which is due to
Bug#316509: calamaris break at loading calamaris::calBars3d
I had a similar message from the calamaris cron.daily: /usr/bin/calamaris: Couldn't load package calamaris::calBars3d, maybe it is not installed: No such file or directory There is a simple workaround: install libgd-graph-perl. /usr/share/perl5/calamaris/calBars3d.pm tries to use parts of GD:Graph. These won't necessarily be available, since calamaris only Suggests the libgd-graph-perl package, rather than Depends on it. Cheers, Andrew Greig -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:34:54 -0400 Glenn Maynard wrote: [...] - I would prefer attribution to excision. Being DFSG-free is a prerequisite for being in Debian, but being DFSG- free does not compel Debian to include a work. Your preferences don't make excision of a work unacceptable. Wait one second... Of course excision is possible, but is it really a good idea? I don't think so. Karsten's document seems to be valuable: DIG writers chose to derive a section from it. And it's GPL-compatible: Karsten's license seems to be, but anyway Karsten himself states he's willing to relicense the document under the actual GPL, if it's considered necessary. Given the above mentioned facts, I don't think we should drop his copyrighted material, just because he asks what he deserves: credit for what he wrote. - Denying contributors proper credit reflects poorly on the Debian Project and discourages future contributions to Debian documentation by third parties, a contribution by which the Project would benefit greatly. If your work is excised, then there is no contribution which is being denied attribution. Obviously, but why do you want to reinvent the wheel? Free program development should be based on code reuse whenever it's suitable. The same applies to free manual development. It's saying please offer contributions under the same license as the rest of the work, which is a legitimate, useful, and common thing to require. This is legitimate, but Karsten is willing to offer his work under the same license as the DIG, so I don't see a reason to drop his 'contribution'... The reasons you have cited are reasons why *you* don't want your work excised, not reasons why it is unacceptable for Debian to do so. I don't know how you can confuse the two. The fact that you're trying to coerce a maintainer to include a work instead of attempting to address his reasons for doing so, is enough for me to agree with Joey's decision. AFAICT, Karsten is not trying to coerce anyone. Actually, Karsten did *not* contribute anything. He wrote a document and published it under a strange license. *Then* some DIG writers found that document and decided (without any coercion) to write a DIG section as a derivative of it. But they failed to comply with its (really permissive) license. Karsten is just asking that they comply with his license and publish the DIG with an appropriate copyright notice. He's even willing to relicense his document, if there are doubts about the GPL-compatibility of his strange license. IMHO the best solution is * Karsten relicense (or dual-license) his document under the GPL * DIG maintainers simply add a name in the copyright holder list Think about it: Karsten wrote a valuable document and is offering it under the GPL; in these times of non-free documentation everywhere, how can you ask more from him? -- :-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-) .. Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgpx2tuSSOaCh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:08:24PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: a) Remove the material concerned from the installation guide in woody and sarge and get new versions uploaded to the archive. Apologise profusely. Potentially still be sued. d) Add attribution to the installation guide in woody and sarge, and remove the material concerned from the archive for the next stable release. Sure. That's fairly equivalent to (a). This seems like If you remove my work from your current version, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. I hope you can understand why I don't believe that arrangement is acceptable--it's no different than if you don't give me $100, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. Yes. And? I don't see (c) happening; if it is, then Karsten's complaint was unclear (which shouldn't be surprising, given its length). Karsten is asserting that a) is doing the wrong thing, which is ridiculous. (c) /is/ happening. Karsten asked for attribution in 2003. And (a) /is/ doing the wrong thing - fixing the situation now doesn't excuse us from the guilt of having been violating his copyright for the past few years, especially when it was pointed out to us some time ago. We've been offered a reasonable way to settle the situation. Karsten's well within his rights to bring legal action, but instead he hasn't even threatened to put it on Slashdot. Which bit of We've been knowingly violating a license for over 2 years, and so we're the bad guys is unclear here? -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316572: WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated!
Package: apt-build Version: 0.12.9 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable apt was upgraded and now seems to use GPG checks for installing packages. apt-build doesn't handle this change, a priori, according to this log : - Moving packages to repository - - Building repository - - Updating package lists - Ign file: apt-build Release.gpg Get:1 file: apt-build Release [89B] Ign file: apt-build/main Packages Get:2 http://security.debian.org testing/updates Release.gpg [197B] Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates Release Ign http://security.debian.org testing/updates/main Packages Ign http://security.debian.org testing/updates/contrib Packages Ign http://security.debian.org testing/updates/non-free Packages Ign http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org ./ Release.gpg Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable Release.gpg Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/main Packages Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/contrib Packages Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable Release Hit http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org ./ Release Hit http://security.debian.org testing/updates/non-free Packages Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/main Packages Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/contrib Packages Ign http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org ./ Packages Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/non-free Packages Hit http://pkg-kde.alioth.debian.org ./ Packages Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/main Sources Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/contrib Sources Hit ftp://ftp2.fr.debian.org unstable/non-free Sources Fetched 90B in 1s (54B/s) Reading package lists... Done Reading package lists... Done Building dependency tree... Done Suggested packages: cdtool setcd hal-doc dialog Recommended packages: librsvg2-bin libterm-size-perl libterm-readkey-perl The following packages will be upgraded: eject grep libhal-dev libhal-storage-dev libhal-storage0 libhal0 libldap-2.2-7 librsvg2-2 librsvg2-common librsvg2-dev module-assistant net-tools 12 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 723kB/1333kB of archives. After unpacking 262kB of additional disk space will be used. WARNING: The following packages cannot be authenticated! net-tools libhal-dev libhal0 libhal-storage-dev libhal-storage0 E: There are problems and -y was used without --force-yes An apt-cache show net-tools give me : # apt-cache show net-tools Package: net-tools Priority: important Section: net Installed-Size: 756 Maintainer: Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Architecture: i386 Version: 1.60-15 Replaces: netbase ( 4.00) Depends: libc6 (= 2.3.2.ds1-21) Filename: ./net-tools_1.60-15_i386.deb Size: 244628 MD5sum: cca4ed10446c6449a7e3550c5d103371 Description: The NET-3 networking toolkit This package includes the important tools for controlling the network subsystem of the Linux kernel. This includes arp, ifconfig, netstat, rarp, nameif and route. Additionally, this package contains utilities relating to particular network hardware types (plipconfig, slattach, mii-tool) and advanced aspects of IP configuration (iptunnel, ipmaddr). . In the upstream package 'hostname' and friends are included. Those are not installed by this package, since there is a special hostname*.deb. Package: net-tools Priority: important Section: net Installed-Size: 656 Maintainer: Bernd Eckenfels [EMAIL PROTECTED] Architecture: i386 Version: 1.60-15 Replaces: netbase ( 4.00) Depends: libc6 (= 2.3.2.ds1-21) Filename: pool/main/n/net-tools/net-tools_1.60-15_i386.deb Size: 248160 MD5sum: 515e89ac785709f3794c0f48a713ac98 Description: The NET-3 networking toolkit This package includes the important tools for controlling the network subsystem of the Linux kernel. This includes arp, ifconfig, netstat, rarp, nameif and route. Additionally, this package contains utilities relating to particular network hardware types (plipconfig, slattach, mii-tool) and advanced aspects of IP configuration (iptunnel, ipmaddr). . In the upstream package 'hostname' and friends are included. Those are not installed by this package, since there is a special hostname*.deb. Package: net-tools Status: install ok installed Priority: important Section: net Installed-Size: 656
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 13:01:26 -0700 Michael K. Edwards wrote: IANAL, IANADD, but it's hard for me to imagine that there is any sensible or just way to resolve this other than to credit Karsten with a significant contribution to the Guide. Such a guide is of course largely factual and could bear many resemblances to Karsten's without constituting plagiarism or a violation of his copyright; but he presents strong evidence that the way this guide actually was written involved copying and adapting portions of his creative expression. Plagiarism would, I think, be too strong a word, and he is something less than a co-author of the Guide; but it seems reasonable for him to ask for some acknowledgment. Agreed. -- :-( This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS? ;-) .. Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 pgp51bdtFfkkD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#316573: move of files in /var/lib/misc to /var/lib/db silently breaks scripts depending on libnss-db
Package: libnss-db Version: 2.2-6.3 Severity: grave The last NMU moved /var/lib/misc/Makefile to /var/lib/db/Makefile. It's not mentioned in the changelog, it breaks existing scripts. sorry, that's just bad style for a NMU. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: setting package to apt-move, severity of 316492 is serious, merging 316492 316207
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.14 package apt-move Ignoring bugs not assigned to: apt-move severity 316492 serious Bug#316492: Unmet dependencies of apt-move in latest unstable... Severity set to `serious'. merge 316492 316207 Bug#316207: needs repackaging for apt 0.6 Bug#316492: Unmet dependencies of apt-move in latest unstable... Merged 316207 316492. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:58:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: Sure. That's fairly equivalent to (a). Just in case I wasn't clear, the point was that the fix for past stable releases, and the fix for unstable and the next release, are unrelated; it's reasonable to do entirely different things, as long as the violation is fixed in all cases. Your choices were listing fixes for stable and fixes for unstable side-by-side. This seems like If you remove my work from your current version, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. I hope you can understand why I don't believe that arrangement is acceptable--it's no different than if you don't give me $100, I'll sue you for your violation in the last version. Yes. And? So you think it's acceptable to have a work in main, whose license is if you're Debian, you're never allowed to remove this work, or I'll sue you for an unrelated, already-fixed[1] past violation? I don't like throwing around overly loaded words, but I can't find any word short of extortion that accurately represents what this seems to be. (FWIW, I did recently criticise Bruce Perens for his use of the same word, but that was due to opening the conversation with it, right in the subject.) Which bit of We've been knowingly violating a license for over 2 years, and so we're the bad guys is unclear here? Debian has offered to correct it, in a perfectly acceptable and legitimate manner. In my viewpoint, (a) is not wrong in any ethical or moral way (legally, I don't know and would prefer not to guess); coercing Debian maintainers to include a work in future releases against their will and judgement is. [1] assuming that the stable release gets fixed soon, of course -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316573: move of files in /var/lib/misc to /var/lib/db silently breaks scripts depending on libnss-db
And the real question is, why did an NMU change it in the first place. On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 01:11:48AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Package: libnss-db Version: 2.2-6.3 Severity: grave The last NMU moved /var/lib/misc/Makefile to /var/lib/db/Makefile. It's not mentioned in the changelog, it breaks existing scripts. sorry, that's just bad style for a NMU. -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ SwissDisk - http://www.swissdisk.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316362: acknowledged by developer (Bug#316362: fixed in drupal 4.5.4-1)
Aleksey I Zavilohin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hmm, where fix in stable? I think you can`t upload new version in sarge. Maybe need contact with Security Team? I have done that. Alas, there hasn't been any response yet. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316578: FTBFS: No rule to make target current_symbols.txt
Package: gcc-4.0 Version: 4.0.0ds1-11 Severity: serious When I tried to rebuild gcc-4.0, it failed as follows: baseline_name=`basename /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i486-linux-gnu`; \ baseline_parentdir=`dirname /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i486-linux-gnu`; \ compat_baseline_name=; \ if [ -f /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i486-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt ]; then \ ( \ echo A baseline file for $baseline_name was found.; \ echo Running the check-abi script ...; \ echo ; \ /usr/bin/make -C /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/build/i486-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite \ check-abi; \ ) debian/README.libstdc++-baseline; \ else \ ( \ echo No baseline file found for $baseline_name.; \ echo Generating a new baseline file ...; \ echo ; \ ) debian/README.libstdc++-baseline; \ mkdir /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i486-linux-gnu; \ /usr/bin/make -C /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/build/i486-linux-gnu/libstdc++-v3/testsuite new-abi-baseline; \ cat /tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1/src/libstdc++-v3/config/abi/i486-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt debian/README.libstdc++-baseline; \ fi make[2]: *** No rule to make target `current_symbols.txt', needed by `check-abi'. Stop. make[1]: *** [debian/README.libstdc++-baseline] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/gcc-4.0-4.0.0ds1' make: *** [binary] Error 2 -- Matt signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 12:17:43AM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: Wait one second... Of course excision is possible, but is it really a good idea? I don't think so. That's not d-legal's decision, or the DPL's. It's the maintainer's decision. There are procedures in place to overrule a maintainer. If you really think that such a thing is a good idea, follow them. Debating the merits of rewrites is far off-topic for d-legal. Think about it: Karsten wrote a valuable document and is offering it under the GPL; in these times of non-free documentation everywhere, how can you ask more from him? I believe I saw Joey offering to rewrite the documentation, with his own time, and only asked to have the relevant sections identified. I'm not sure that I see the entire situation, since a quick review shows the GPL on one side and ad-hoc on the other--the GPL isn't an ad-hoc license. Karsten didn't make any real attempt to summarize the situation, though, instead dumping pages of past history on the list and expecting us to pull out a fine-toothed-comb, and I don't have the time or interest to do that. I do know that I see Joey being reasonable, apologizing, and offering to help fix the problem, so I have zero tolerance for Karsten's demanding, who-do-you-think- you-are, you-can't-remove-my-work, fix-it-my-way-or-else, I'm-going- over-your-head attitude. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316579: fam: compact flash card destroyed
Package: fam Severity: critical Justification: causes serious data loss Fam was installed via dependancies of the gnome virtual package. Since it was running it appears to have kept an open handle on one of my compact flash cards when it was attached to the system and thus it was inadvertantly removed without completely unmounting. The unmount command was issued via right-click on the gnome desktop media icon and appeared to have complete successfully (icon no longer on the desktop). However, the media is now completely and utterly unusable in any system as all report that it does not have a partition table and it is impossible to partition the media (all attempts on both Linux and Mac OS X fail). I've had numerous problems with fam locking removable media incorrectly (as have others judging by the reports). -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (400, 'testing'), (300, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.10-1-k7 Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Versions of packages fam depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-22 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.4.3-13 GCC support library ii libstdc++5 1:3.3.5-13 The GNU Standard C++ Library v3 ii portmap 5-9 The RPC portmapper -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
on Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 05:08:27PM -0500, Bill Allombert ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: The Debian Project has been distributing this work in violation of my copyrights. I've previously requested this be remedied in 2003, the situation remains uncorrected: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00489.html Hello Karsten, You got an answer to this email which state: Sure, I remember reading your page, among others, as I was drafting that, 11 months ago. If you feel you should be listed, please list yourself. So, did you list yourself at that time? No, I did not. I don't know the process for listing myself. As I've stated under the current bug discussion (bug #316487), I'm not a DD, I'm not familiar with the Debian documentation tools. Moreover: I didn't add the material to the documentation in the first place, and I see no reason why execution of license compliance issues should be up to me. I've opened a bug at this time so that the maintainers of this package will address the oversight. [There is no answer from you in the archives.] I don't recall if I responded at the time or not. I don't believe either case materially affects the current situation. Peace. -- Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.comhttp://kmself.home.netcom.com/ What Part of Gestalt don't you understand? First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. - Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
This one time, at band camp, Glenn Maynard said: On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:58:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: So you think it's acceptable to have a work in main, whose license is if you're Debian, you're never allowed to remove this work, or I'll sue you for an unrelated, already-fixed[1] past violation? I don't like throwing around overly loaded words, but I can't find any word short of extortion that accurately represents what this seems to be. Do you really not understand actual license issues? There is, as I understand it, a currently released work, which knowingly incorporates a substantial amount of Karsten's work, and violates his license in doing so. This is not some hypothetical case that is being beaten to death on -legal about whether some stipulation or other is free enough, this is a real case of Debian violating a license. The past violation is not fixed. That is the only important thing here. If maintainers want to do a blackbox rewrite so as to avoid the onerous condition of adding the line 'some parts written by Karsten Self', then that is up to them to deal with for future releases. That is not the issue here, and if you think it is, you've missed the boat. Which bit of We've been knowingly violating a license for over 2 years, and so we're the bad guys is unclear here? Debian has offered to correct it, in a perfectly acceptable and legitimate manner. In my viewpoint, (a) is not wrong in any ethical or moral way (legally, I don't know and would prefer not to guess); coercing Debian maintainers to include a work in future releases against their will and judgement is. You are wrong on two points as far as I can see: Debian has not offered to correct it. What has been offered is excision from future releases. This does nothing for present and past releases. Karsten is not attempting to coerce anyone to do anything. He has simply stated fairly straightforward facts. Debian has been violating his license for several years; he would like it corrected in released works. If Debian continues to use his works, they should abide by his license for future releases. If, for some obscure reason, the maintainers feel it is easier to rewrite four pages of text than properly credit a long term contributor to the Debian project, then that is their prerogative, but it is not relevant to the discussion at hand. Also, rather simply put, I think we would be doing badly by the project as a whole if we were to start telling contributors that we would rather excise their work and rewrite it rather than acknowledge a contribution. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:16:29PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: Karsten M. Self wrote: debian-legal and DPL added to distribution. I'm afraid that by escalating this unnecessarily, as well as resorting to certian rhetoric (for which I cannot be bothered to do a point-by-point rebuttal), you've convinced me it's best I bow out of the discussion, permantly. Karsten's complaints look surprisingly similar to yours in #265620. dave... -- David Schleef Big Kitten LLC (http://www.bigkitten.com/) -- data acquisition on Linux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 09:02:46PM -0400, Stephen Gran wrote: Do you really not understand actual license issues? There is, as I understand it, a currently released work, which knowingly incorporates a substantial amount of Karsten's work, and violates his license in doing so. This is not some hypothetical case that is being beaten to death on -legal about whether some stipulation or other is free enough, this is a real case of Debian violating a license. The past violation is not fixed. That is the only important thing here. If maintainers want to do a blackbox rewrite so as to avoid the onerous condition of adding the line 'some parts written by Karsten Self', then that is up to them to deal with for future releases. That is not the issue here, and if you think it is, you've missed the boat. I don't think anything of the sort, and if you think I do, you're not paying attention in the slightest. Debian has not offered to correct it. What has been offered is excision from future releases. This does nothing for present and past releases. I see Karsten claiming that nothing is being done, and yet: on Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:56:32AM -0400, Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: which is ... today. Joey was actively communicating, working to resolve the issue. Karsten didn't happen to like how he intended to resolve it, so he waylaid that discussion. It's probably entirely true that this issue sat unresolved far longer than it should have, but it's ridiculous to claim that Debian, *currently*, is being unresponsive on the same day that you're discussing the issue. All in all, if I was working with someone trying to resolve a licensing issue, he decided that he didn't like the perfectly legitimate option I'd selected, started screaming at the DPL and d-legal to override me, claiming unresponsiveness--despite discussing the issue that very day--and claiming that it's unacceptable to remove a work at my discretion, I'd probably have a similar reaction that Joey did--throwing my arms in the air and letting someone else deal with that person. In any event, this is going nowhere. The options are clear (as previously enumerated); adding an attribution in the past stable releases and removing the material in unstable and future releases seems perfectly reasonable (or, for faster response, adding attributions to both, and then removing the material as it's rewritten), as far as I can see. Unless someone has something new to add, I'm dropping this. -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
Glenn Maynard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:58:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: Yes. And? So you think it's acceptable to have a work in main, whose license is if you're Debian, you're never allowed to remove this work, or I'll sue you for an unrelated, already-fixed[1] past violation? I don't like throwing around overly loaded words, but I can't find any word short of extortion that accurately represents what this seems to be. No. In that case I'd say So sue us. Demanding that something never be removed is more unreasonable than rewriting something that we stole. Demanding acknowledgement isn't. Really. Listen to yourself. Are you honestly claiming that someone asking that we acknowledge his (involuntary) contribution to Debian is an unreasonable act? Are you honestly claiming that choosing to rewrite that text instead of giving due credit is not petty? Which bit of We've been knowingly violating a license for over 2 years, and so we're the bad guys is unclear here? Debian has offered to correct it, in a perfectly acceptable and legitimate manner. The manner in which we've offered to correct it is plainly not perfectly acceptable to Karsten, otherwise it would have been accepted. In my viewpoint, (a) is not wrong in any ethical or moral way (legally, I don't know and would prefer not to guess); coercing Debian maintainers to include a work in future releases against their will and judgement is. You think it's ethical to rewrite a perfectly good section of text rather than give appropriate credit to the original author? I think you're mad. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: marked as done (debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4)
Your message dated Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:23:29 -0700 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 1 Jul 2005 10:13:35 + From kmself@ix.netcom.com Fri Jul 01 03:13:33 2005 Return-path: kmself@ix.netcom.com Received: from smtpauth07.mail.atl.earthlink.net [209.86.89.67] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoIWb-00077w-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 03:13:33 -0700 Received: from [66.81.220.20] (helo=localhost) by smtpauth07.mail.atl.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DoIWZ-jH-MB; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 06:13:32 -0400 Received: from karsten by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DoIWU-Ld-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 03:13:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 From: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4 X-Mailer: reportbug 3.12 Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 03:13:26 -0700 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com X-ELNK-Trace: fb8b5507a77b41ab6f36dc87813833b2494a2b12faa40c43f6f76da8ff22e432a0b50f3289e869ac350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 66.81.220.20 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: debian-installer-manual Severity: serious Justification: Policy 2.3 Section C.4 of the Debian GNU/Linux Installation Guide is based on notes I wrote for performing a chroot installation of Debian under an existing GNU/Linux system. The current version of the manual has modified this work, but is still clearly based on the documents I wrote originally in 1999, and further ammended in 2002 and continue to maintain, with most recent modifications in May, 2004: http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/install-under-chroot.html http://kmself.home.netcom.com/GNU/Linux/FAQs/DebianChrootInstall.html http://twiki.iwethey.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/DebianChrootInstall The terms for distribution of my work is clearly stated: © 2002-2004 Karsten M. Self (kmself@ix.netcom.com) This document may be freely distributed, copied, or modified, with attribution, this notice, and the following disclaimer: THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES. The Debian Project has been distributing this work in violation of my copyrights. I've previously requested this be remedied in 2003, the situation remains uncorrected: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00489.html The use of my works has been confirmed by one of the debian-installer-manual developers: http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2003/05/msg00491.html My distribution terms *are* DFSG free. I'm merely requesting that credit for my contributions be given. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers testing APT policy: (950, 'testing'), (400, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.8-2-686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1) --- Received: (at 316487-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Jul 2005 03:23:36 + From kmself@ix.netcom.com Fri Jul 01 20:23:36 2005 Return-path: kmself@ix.netcom.com Received: from smtpauth01.mail.atl.earthlink.net [209.86.89.61] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DoYbQ-0008Tx-00; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 20:23:36 -0700 Received: from [66.81.222.133] (helo=localhost) by smtpauth01.mail.atl.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DoYbO-0007Ql-Rg for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 23:23:35 -0400 Received: from karsten by localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DoYbJ-0004Be-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 20:23:29 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005
Bug#316585: uptimed: ftbfs [sparc] `aclocal-1.4' is needed
Package: uptimed Version: 1:0.3.3-6 Severity: serious Tags: sid Justification: fails to build from source uptimed failed to build from source on a sparc buildd, duplicated on my sparc pbuilder. It also failed to build on some other buildds. dh_testdir /usr/bin/make make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/uptimed-0.3.3' cd . /tmp/buildd/uptimed-0.3.3/missing aclocal-1.4 WARNING: `aclocal-1.4' is needed, and you do not seem to have it handy on your system. You might have modified some files without having the proper tools for further handling them. Check the `README' file, it often tells you about the needed prerequirements for installing this package. You may also peek at any GNU archive site, in case some other package would contain this missing `aclocal-1.4' program. make[1]: *** [aclocal.m4] Error 1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316281: proposed NMU patch
Hi, It would be nice if there was such an option, but I see no hint of it in 'man apt-get' or 'apt-get --help'. pbuilder needs to work with multiple releases, so if there was such a new option that did not work in woody, sarge, etch and sid it souldn't be used. (or pbuilder could be comlicated to test for it...) it works in sid already (and is documented in the man page there, too) and will certainly in etch. But you are right that it won't work for woody and sarge chroots. I still believe it would be wrong to use --force-yes since that may override many valid errors while --allow-unauthenticated will only override the one error we're seeing. Perhaps we can detect wether we need the option, somehow? --force-yes seems to be a quick and handy workaround; it's the chroot and I don't think it would be so disastrous to break it with --force-yes. --allow-unauthenticated requires some conditionals, we may try to work towards it at a later time. I'll prepare a 0.128; anyone care to sponsor-upload ? regards, junichi -- Junichi Uekawa, Debian Developer http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/ 183A 70FC 4732 1B87 57A5 CE82 D837 7D4E E81E 55C1 pgpWWsNen7gDD.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#315467: missing kill-quagga-prompt when upgrading
I think this bug's severity should be set to wishlist, losing routes temporarily because of a daemon restart does not count as data loss. Nearly every daemon gets restarted after installation, dh_installinit (debhelper) defaults to that anyway. Nevertheless, please consider restarting quagga after installation, or adding a debconf prompt of choosing between a stop-upgrade-start and an upgrade-restart path. openvpn does that, I quote the debconf dialog: In some cases you may be upgrading openvpn in a remote server using a VPN to do so. The upgrade process stops the running daemon before installing the new version, in that case you may lose your connection, the upgrade may be interrupted, and you may not be able to reconnect to the remote host. Unless you do your upgrades locally, it is advised NOT to stop openvpn before it gets upgraded. The installation process will restart it once it's done. This option will take effect in your next upgrade. Would you like to stop openvpn before it gets upgraded? I think this should be the case with quagga. If you try to upgade a remote router and you rely on quagga running to have your connection established, you will get disconnected before the upgrade and the upgrade will probably fail if user input is needed (eg. upgrading a conffile). Achilleas Kotsis a.k.a. Achille Webpage: http://www.cslab.ntua.gr/~akots/ AWMN.org: http://www.awmn.org/ -- whois awk?, sed Grep -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: adding tags
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
tags 315703 security
Bug#315703: cacti: remote vulnerabilities (CAN 2005-{1524,1525,1526})
Tags were: sarge
Tags added: security
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 12:36:14PM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote: This bug concerns appropriate copyright notice in the Debian Installer Guide which adapts substantial material originally written by me. My license allows use under DFSG compliant guidelines, but requests attribution. I initially requested attribution in May, 2003, a DIG author admitted to using my work in writing this section of the DIG, but requested I submit a patch (I'm not familiar with Debian's document system and patches -- I'm not a DD). Ok, change committed. You are now attributed in the administrivia section. Thanks for the great doc. - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#316487: debian-installer-manual: Missing copyright credit: Karsten M. Self for section C.4
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:15:36PM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: Ok, change committed. You are now attributed in the administrivia section. Thanks for the great doc. You suck. You know you just ended a potentially great and entertaining flamewar by leaving one side without arguments? ;-) (jk, of course. Thanks for doing the reasonable thing) -- The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely one bananosecond -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: reassign 295213 to upgrade-reports
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.8.15 reassign 295213 upgrade-reports Bug#295213: general: Upgrade removed /usr/local (symlink) Bug reassigned from package `general' to `upgrade-reports'. End of message, stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
