Re: Crack? Cops?
On Sat, Jan 30, 1999 at 12:25:10PM -0700, Bear Giles wrote: On a related note, I noticed that 'cops' is absent. Again, is this deliberate or does it need a maintainer? AFAIK noone ever proposed packaing it. So go ahead and do it. Michael -- Michael Meskes | Go SF 49ers! Th.-Heuss-Str. 61, D-41812 Erkelenz| Go Rhein Fire! Tel.: (+49) 2431/72651 | Use Debian GNU/Linux! Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Use PostgreSQL!
Re: Crack? Cops?
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Bear Giles wrote: I noticed in my slink snapshot (from last month) that 'cracklib2' exists, 'crack-dict' is suggested but *doesn't* exist (either as a package or in the 'Packages' list), and 'crack' is nowhere to be seen. I packaged cracklib2 and still plan on packaging crack-dict. No plans for crack yet. Is the omission of 'crack' deliberate, or does it need a maintainer? US export policy should be no more of a problem than it is with /bin/passwd and /bin/login. Yes deliberate. On a related note, I noticed that 'cops' is absent. Again, is this deliberate or does it need a maintainer? No maintainer for this one either. Go for it. -- Jean Pierre
Crack? Cops?
I noticed in my slink snapshot (from last month) that 'cracklib2' exists, 'crack-dict' is suggested but *doesn't* exist (either as a package or in the 'Packages' list), and 'crack' is nowhere to be seen. Is the omission of 'crack' deliberate, or does it need a maintainer? US export policy should be no more of a problem than it is with /bin/passwd and /bin/login. On a related note, I noticed that 'cops' is absent. Again, is this deliberate or does it need a maintainer? Neither package is listed on the prospective packages. Bear Giles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
