Re: RFS: furl
2008/12/26 Weboide webo...@codealpha.net: Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package furl. * Package name: furl Version : 2.1-1 Upstream Author : Kidney Bingos aka Chris Williams ch...@kidney-bingos.demon.co.uk * URL : http://www.gumbynet.org.uk/software/furl.html * License : GPL Section : utils It builds these binary packages: furl - command-line application that shows HTTP headers returned by web-servers The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 508671 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/furl - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/furl/furl_2.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I've alredy packaged furl some times ago, but it was never uploaded, because there are alredy some packages (heads, libperlwww, curl and wget, for example) that do the same work. In the homepage [1] is avaible the debian package [2]. Regards, [1] http://www.gumbynet.org.uk/software/furl.html [2] http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/ -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Packaging a non-free software
Hi Mentors, I want this software [1] avaible in debian, but is released as binary-only without any license. There are any chance to put my package [2] in debian, non-free archive? I'm asked upstreams about license, if the source code is avaible, etc... and I'm waiting a reply. Thanks a lot for your help, bye [1] http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/download/fonspot [2] http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/binary/fon-linuxspot_0.2beta_i386.deb -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to write a good manpage ?
Hi Mentors, I always used help2man to generate a manpage for those packages that hasn't one. But now, I'm working on a package that has a non useful help output: $ gcstar --help Usage: /usr/bin/gcstar [[-u|--update [-a|--all] [-c|--collection] [-w|--website] [-i|--import] [-e|--export] [-l|--lang]] | [FILE]] How can I write a manpage good for debian? thanks a lot, -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC / RFS: furl_2.1-1
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:15:59 +0100 James Westby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On (11/08/06 12:26), Marco Bertorello wrote: Hi Mentors, I'm looking for comment (and possibly a sponsor) about my package furl: First, the packaging looks very good overall. I've corrected all things: http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1.dsc http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1_i386.changes http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1_i386.deb http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1.orig.tar.gz http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1.diff.gz A few small points: * debian/changelog: you should close an ITP bug with the upload. See http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ for instructions on reporting the ITP. The add (Closes: #x) to the line in the changelog, where x is the bug number you get assigned. I've done an ITP and close it. * The description could be longer, but I'm not sure there's too much more youcould say. Perhaps add that it can impersonate IE or Mozilla, and that the request can be specified. I've added this notice to description * You should add an actual license header to debian/copyright. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html Fixed. * debian/rules: You don't need dh_installexamples, also some people don't like commented dh_ calls. * debian/furl.1 says furl [OPTIONS] [URL] [filename], but doesn't say what filename is for, and furl http://www.google.com/ temp shows the usage text (though the usage text also shows this syntax) I've used CDBS and cdbs-edit-patch, because dpatch wan't work with this patch (I don't understand why), but now rules file is more clean ;-) On [EMAIL PROTECTED], some people said that this package is a waste of disk space because there are several packages that do the same thing. Is that a problem? thanks a lot, -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator Acktel S.r.l. Strada Comunale Savonesa, 9 15050 Rivalta Scrivia - Tortona (AL) http://www.acktel.com Informativa per il trattamento dei dati personali legge 196/2003 (codice privacy), per consultare l'informativa collegarsi a: http://www.acktel.com/privacy.php signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFC / RFS: furl_2.1-1
Hi Mentors, I'm looking for comment (and possibly a sponsor) about my package furl: * Package name: furl Version : 2.1-1 Upstream Author : Kidney Bingos [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://freshmeat.net/redir/furl/50660/url_homepage/furl.html * License : GPL V2 (or later) * Section : net It builds these binary packages: furl - a small utility for displaying the HTTP headers returned by Web servers Sources and binary packages are avaible here: http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1.dsc http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1_i386.changes http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1_i386.deb http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1.orig.tar.gz http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/furl/furl_2.1-1.diff.gz It's lintian and linda free. Thanks a lot for your attention and sorry for my english ;-) bye, -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC / RFS: furl_2.1-1
On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:15:59 +0100 James Westby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On (11/08/06 12:26), Marco Bertorello wrote: Hi Mentors, I'm looking for comment (and possibly a sponsor) about my package furl: First, the packaging looks very good overall. Hi James, A few small points: * debian/changelog: you should close an ITP bug with the upload. See http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ for instructions on reporting the ITP. The add (Closes: #x) to the line in the changelog, where x is the bug number you get assigned. Sure, but I prefer have some comments before open the ITP. I'll open ITP soon :) (To everyone else on the list, is X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org added automatically? I haven't filed on myself, but it seems like they all go to the list, and I'm sure that not everyone manually adds this.) * The description could be longer, but I'm not sure there's too much more youcould say. Perhaps add that it can impersonate IE or Mozilla, and that the request can be specified. Yes, I've not much to write in description, but your idea is good! * You should add an actual license header to debian/copyright. See http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html I don't understand :-( copyright file must have: - The author(s) name - The year(s) of the copyright - The used license(s) - The URL to the upstream source and my copyrigth has: Upstream Author: Kidney Bingos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Copyright: Copyright (C) 1999 BingosNET Produktions Ltd License: GPL V2 (or later) It was downloaded from http://freshmeat.net/redir/furl/50660/url_homepage/furl.html what's wrong? * debian/rules: You don't need dh_installexamples, also some people don't like commented dh_ calls. Sure, I've forget delete commented entries and remove unused dh_ stuff :-( I'll fix them soon * debian/furl.1 says furl [OPTIONS] [URL] [filename], but doesn't say what filename is for, and furl http://www.google.com/ temp shows the usage text (though the usage text also shows this syntax) hmmm... maybe this is an upstream bug ? debian/furl.1 is generated by help2man (that's read the output of --help switch). If it's, I'll notice the upstream about this (and fix the manpage). Thanks a lot for your attention and sorry for my english ;-) I see nothing wrong with your English. Thanks for packaging this, I will certainly be using it. Unfortunately I can't upload it myself. no problem, thanks a lot for your help bye, -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it signature.asc Description: PGP signature
RFC: denyhosts_2.5
Hi mentors, I've tried to fix my packages, against all bug-reports that I've recieved and following the new python policy. Specially, I need some comments about the solution to #361085. Here you can find all files that you need: http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts_2.5-1_all.deb http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts_2.5-1.diff.gz http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts_2.5-1.dsc http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts_2.5-1_i386.changes http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts_2.5.orig.tar.gz http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts-common_2.5-1_all.deb http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts-python2.3_2.5-1_all.deb http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian/denyhosts-2.5/denyhosts-python2.4_2.5-1_all.deb I've used CDBS and I've found some problems about the upstream setup.py (I must install something manually to have package working well, see rules file). Can you suggest me how can I fix the setup.py to work well with CDBS or the right way to operate? thanks a lot (and sorry for my english :) ), P.S. FYI, this package is also avaible in collab-maint on alioth: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/denyhosts/ -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator http://bertorello.ns0.it pgp52GfQoxjWp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Linda warnings about manpages in my packages
Hi Folk, I've three packages: denyhosts-python2.3 denyhosts-python2.4 denyhosts-common the binaries are stored in packages -python2.X but the manpage (common to alla packages) is stored in denyhosts-common. Now, i've this linda reports: # linda -i denyhosts-python2.3_2.3-2_all.deb Linda: Running as root, dropping to nobody. E: denyhosts-python2.3; No manual page for binary denyhosts. The binary displayed doesn't have a corresponding manual page, while Policy dictates that every binary in /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /usr/games and /usr/X11R6/bin requires a manual page. # linda -i denyhosts-python2.4_2.3-2_all.deb Linda: Running as root, dropping to nobody. E: denyhosts-python2.4; No manual page for binary denyhosts. The binary displayed doesn't have a corresponding manual page, while Policy dictates that every binary in /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin, /usr/games and /usr/X11R6/bin requires a manual page. What is, in your opinion, the right way to operate? Can I ignore these linda warning? Cheers, -- Marco Bertorello System Administrator Linux Registered User #319921 pgpovbZ2iUK8b.pgp Description: PGP signature
RFC: denyhosts
Hi, I'm working on a new package called denyhosts. The program is a python script that can monitor a log file (default /var/log/auth.log) for ssh brute-force attack attempts and block them adding an entry in /etc/hosts.deny. The homepage is http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/ I've alredy submitted an ITP bugreport for this package: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=338694 Currently I've tested the package with lintian and linda and no errors was found. You can see the package using this repository: deb-src http://bertorello.ns0.it/debian sources/ Thanks for any comments :) Greetings, P.S. Sorry for my orrible english :P -- Marco BertorelloSystem Administrator Linux Registered User #319921 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Temono cio' che non conoscono... e disprezzano cio' che temono... -- Janos Audron signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: denyhosts
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 19:48:12 +0100 Nico Golde [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, * Marco Bertorello [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-01-16 19:41]: I'm working on a new package called denyhosts. The program is a python script that can monitor a log file (default /var/log/auth.log) for ssh brute-force attack attempts and block them adding an entry in /etc/hosts.deny. The homepage is http://denyhosts.sourceforge.net/ Are there any significant differences to the fail2ban package? If not keep it away from the archive ;) Sure! ;-) fail2ban is also python and Description: bans IPs that cause multiple authentication errors Monitors (in daemon mode) or just scans log files (e.g. /var/log/auth.log, /var/log/apache/access.log) and temporarily bans failure-prone addresses by updating existing firewall rules. Currently, by default, supports ssh/apache but configuration can be easily extended for scanning the other ASCII log files. Firewall rules are given in the config file, thus it can be adopted to be used with a variety of firewalls (e.g. iptables, ipfwadm) Like the description explain, fail2ban use firewall rules and not everybody want use iptables (or any other kind of firewall). denyhosts can run on systems that haven't support for packet filtering, fail2ban can ? :) BTW, why keep it away from the archive ? Users that can choose are happy users :) Thanks, -- Marco BertorelloSystem Administrator Linux Registered User #319921 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Grande idea! L'avrei messa in pratica io se non fosse che non l'ho fatto :-) - Antonio Messina signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: RFC: denyhosts
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:29:14 -0500 Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 07:24:25PM +0100, Marco Bertorello wrote: Hi, I'm working on a new package called denyhosts. The program is a python script that can monitor a log file (default /var/log/auth.log) for ssh brute-force attack attempts and block them adding an entry in /etc/hosts.deny. How does it do so? That is a configuration file (and not a conffile), but AFAIK there is no interface allowing batch modification. I don't understand... /etc/hosts.deny is a ASCII text file. It can be manipulated also using a bash script, banally with somethings like: echo sshd: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx But I think that I' ve not understood your question... :-( Thanks, -- Marco BertorelloSystem Administrator Linux Registered User #319921 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Certo che Solaris รจ flessibile... come un pezzo di ghisa -- io signature.asc Description: PGP signature
