Umfrage Internet Portal fuer behinderte Menschen
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich beabsichtige in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Kreisbehindertenring im Kreis Göppingen, eine Homepage für Menschen mit Behinderung Ihrer Familie, Freunde wie Interessierte zu erstellen. Für die Gestaltung der Homepage ist Ihre Mithilfe von unschätzbaren Wert. Deshalb bitten wir Sie, diesen Fragebogen auszufüllen. Als Dank für Ihre Mithilfe haben Sie die Möglichkeit einen Einkaufsgutschein über 25 in einem Geschäft Ihrer Wahl zu gewinnen, wenn Ihr Namensvorschlag von uns ausgewählt wird. Zum Online Fragebogen folgen Sie bitte diesem Link: http://www.a-riechmann.de/index.php?act=poll Ich bedanke mich für Ihre Mithilfe und verbleibe mit freundlichen Grüssen Andreas Riechmann P.S. Ihre E-Mail Adresse wurde mit einem Suchagenten aus einer Homepage bzw. Newsgroup einmalig für diese Mail gespidert. Ich versichere Ihnen, dass weitere Mails ohne ihre Zustimmung nicht folgen werden. Ferner versichere ich Ihnen, dass ich Ihre E-Mail Adresse nicht weitergeben werde. Sollten Sie denoch wünschen, dass Ihre E-Mail Adresse aus meiner Datenbank entfernt wird, so folgen Sie bitte diesem Link: http://www.a-riechmann.de/index.php?act=Remove[EMAIL PROTECTED]
date strings
Hi All,
While translating date.fa.po I noticed this and other similar strings:
q{[%]d [%]s-[%]d [%]s}, $sday, $smon_str, $eday, $emon_str
Am I right in my assumption that these strings are not to be customized in
any way?
Greetings,
Arash
--
The FarsiKDE Project
www.farsikde.org
Re: date strings
Arash Zeini: Am I right in my assumption that these strings are not to be customized in any way? They're there exactly to *be* customized. Did you read the comments? -- \\// Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/ I do not read or respond to mail with HTML attachments.
Re: date strings
* Arash Zeini [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-07-30 10:53]:
While translating date.fa.po I noticed this and other similar strings:
q{[%]d [%]s-[%]d [%]s}, $sday, $smon_str, $eday, $emon_str
Am I right in my assumption that these strings are not to be customized in
any way?
Partly right. They should be customized according to your LC_TIME
locale. If the date format for your language is different than what it
looks like on the english pages please change it.
Like, some people who think about starting an en_US fork of the pages
would set the date format to something like MM/DD/ (month first).
Especially the parts with $dateform should be changed (there is textual
content in there), and you might like to add spaces around the dash in
your above example, or add . after the day (like we do for the german
strings).
HTH HAND,
Alfie
--
use Mail::Signature;
$sig = Mail::Signature-new;
print $sig-random;
pgpevuzeBo255.pgp
Description: PGP signature
patch http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
s/because are encumbered by/because they are encumbered by/ -- Regards, Tommy - http://www.geocities.com/todu5811/autosignature?1125 RFC2440 fingerprint: 4445 BB5E AE67 A0C9 7B25 5715 F938 88CB 7A10 2364
patch http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
I suggest replacing this: Even when searching on subwords is not checked, appending an asterisk, '*', to the end of a keyword will allow subword searching for that word. with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. or optionally with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. If you append an asterix to one of your keywords, that particular keyword will be searched for subwords. Also, I wonder, why not enable regex searching for those inclined? I understand Google can't do that due to their huge db. But is the package db really too big for that? Or are there other reasons? -- Regards, Tommy - http://www.geocities.com/todu5811/autosignature?1126 RFC2440 fingerprint: 4445 BB5E AE67 A0C9 7B25 5715 F938 88CB 7A10 2364
Re: patch http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 11:05:48AM +0200, Tommy Dugandzic wrote: I suggest replacing this: Even when searching on subwords is not checked, appending an asterisk, '*', to the end of a keyword will allow subword searching for that word. with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. or optionally with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. If you append an asterix to one of your keywords, that particular keyword will be searched for subwords. Both of your rephrasings are incorrect: enabling the searching for subwords option is equivalent to appending an asterix to the end of the keywords. Also, I wonder, why not enable regex searching for those inclined? I understand Google can't do that due to their huge db. But is the package db really too big for that? Or are there other reasons? Because the package database is indexed by an old version of swish that does not support regex searching. -- Matt
Re: patch http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:46:26AM +0200, Tommy Dugandzic wrote: s/because are encumbered by/because they are encumbered by/ Thanks, done. -- Matt
Re: patch http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Matt Kraai wrote: I suggest replacing this: Even when searching on subwords is not checked, appending an asterisk, '*', to the end of a keyword will allow subword searching for that word. with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. or optionally with this: Searching for subwords is not checked unless you append an asterix (*) to the end of a keyword. If you append an asterix to one of your keywords, that particular keyword will be searched for subwords. Both of your rephrasings are incorrect: enabling the searching for subwords option is equivalent to appending an asterix to the end of the keywords. Oh, sorry. I misunderstood the meaning of the word checked used in this case. I thought you meant checked as in verified. But you meant checked as in the checkbox clicked. Now it all makes sense ;). Also, I wonder, why not enable regex searching for those inclined? I understand Google can't do that due to their huge db. But is the package db really too big for that? Or are there other reasons? Because the package database is indexed by an old version of swish that does not support regex searching. Ok. So it's not on purpose at least. -- Regards, Tommy - http://www.geocities.com/todu5811/autosignature?1128 RFC2440 fingerprint: 4445 BB5E AE67 A0C9 7B25 5715 F938 88CB 7A10 2364
Re: Dudes, the BTS is broken
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:03:23PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: Someone has been nice and closed all my bugs for me and every other developer. Eg http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Works for me ... For a moment there I could reproduce it. It's possible that the index file was getting rewritten or something? -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Dudes, the BTS is broken
Someone has been nice and closed all my bugs for me and every other developer. Eg http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian Bug report logs: maintainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note that maintainers may use different Maintainer fields for different packages, so there may be other reports filed under different addresses. -- No reports found! No idea what has happened, but specific bugs are visible if you know their number. - Craig (Bug free for 0 days) -- Craig Small VK2XLZ GnuPG:1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 Eye-Net Consulting http://www.enc.com.au/[EMAIL PROTECTED] MIEEE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian developer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mask email address
Hi, Have you considered masking e-mail addresses on the public web archives so that spam robots won't pick them up ? For instance, my work e-mail address made it into this page: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-m68k-changes/2001/debian-devel-m68k-changes-200106/msg00387.html and I am afraid I receive spam because of this. (Of course this is not your fault but the spammer's fault, but he's a lost case :) Thanks a lot, Tormod Volden
Re: Dudes, the BTS is broken
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 09:54:44PM +1000, Craig Small wrote: Someone has been nice and closed all my bugs for me and every other developer. Eg http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Works for me ... Debian Bug report logs: maintainer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note that maintainers may use different Maintainer fields for different packages, so there may be other reports filed under different addresses. Serious policy violations - outstanding * #178541: mnogosearch-pgsql-dev: Has a file that conflicts with mnogosearch-pgsql: /usr/lib/libudmsearch.a Package: mnogosearch-pgsql-dev; Severity: serious; Reported by: Devin Bayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tags: woody; 184 days old. * #201624: lprng_3.8.21-1(mips/unstable): configure built with broken libtool.m4 Package: lprng; Severity: serious; Reported by: Ryan Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 13 days old. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dudes, the BTS is broken
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:03:23PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: Someone has been nice and closed all my bugs for me and every other developer. Eg http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Works for me ... For a moment there I could reproduce it. It's possible that the index file was getting rewritten or something? Yes its back now. Was about 5 minutes or so. Oh well, 5 minutes of bug-free greatness. Fun while it lasted. 2. That which causes joy or happiness. Indeed it did. - Craig -- Craig Small VK2XLZ GnuPG:1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 Eye-Net Consulting http://www.enc.com.au/[EMAIL PROTECTED] MIEEE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian developer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dudes, the BTS is broken
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 02:04:40PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:03:23PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: Craig Small wrote: Someone has been nice and closed all my bugs for me and every other developer. Eg http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Works for me ... For a moment there I could reproduce it. It's possible that the index file was getting rewritten or something? It's written to a .new file and atomically renamed, so that would be most odd ... -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: mask email address
* Tormod Volden [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-07-30 13:59]: Have you considered masking e-mail addresses on the public web archives so that spam robots won't pick them up ? Yes, we have considered it but haven't yet found a way that will please most. One benefit of the archives is that people can write mails to the list or sender in a helpful way. For instance, my work e-mail address made it into this page: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-m68k-changes/2001/debian-devel-m68k-changes-200106/msg00387.html Funny, I didn't know that the -changes lists are archived, too... and I am afraid I receive spam because of this. You might be right. Some lists are even archived on different places, like in usenet groups (linux.debian.devel e.g., which is reachable through web (gmame, google groups) too), so changing them on our webarchive only doesn't change much. But like I said, there are discussions going on how to mask the addresses so they are still usable for people reading the archive and meaning not too much problem for them, and on the other hand let the spambots not have it so easy to crawl them. If you know a good way (substituding @ to (at) and . to (dot) or similar is no good way: It hurts the people using the archive but can easily automated by spamcrawlers) please let us know. So long, Alfie -- use Mail::Signature; $sig = Mail::Signature-new; print $sig-random; pgpTvIkCT7JHS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: mask email address
Thanks for your reply ! On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: Have you considered masking e-mail addresses on the public web archives so that spam robots won't pick them up ? Yes, we have considered it but haven't yet found a way that will please most. One benefit of the archives is that people can write mails to the list or sender in a helpful way. For instance, my work e-mail address made it into this page: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-m68k-changes/2001/debian-devel-m68k-changes-200106/msg00387.html Funny, I didn't know that the -changes lists are archived, too... Yes, I was mailing privately to a maintainer, I would never use this address on a mailing list or bug database... Gotta be careful :) and I am afraid I receive spam because of this. You might be right. Some lists are even archived on different places, like in usenet groups (linux.debian.devel e.g., which is reachable through web (gmame, google groups) too), so changing them on our webarchive only doesn't change much. But like I said, there are discussions going on how to mask the addresses so they are still usable for people reading the archive and meaning not too much problem for them, and on the other hand let the spambots not have it so easy to crawl them. If you know a good way (substituding @ to (at) and . to (dot) or similar is no good way: It hurts the people using the archive but can easily automated by spamcrawlers) please let us know. Actually, to code in html like this seems to help a lot: #118;#111;#108;#100;#101;#110;#064;#105;#113;#101;#046; #112;#104;#121;#116;#046;#101;#116;#104;#122;#046;#099;#104; People can then still use cut'n'paste to get the e-mail address, but the robots doesn't pick it up (so far). One might also insert other non- displayed html-tags between the letters that will confuse the mean robots. Best regards, Tormod Volden
Re: Debian WWW CVS commit by joey: webwml/english/security/2003 dsa-354.wml
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:51:43 -0600 Debian WWW CVS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: CVSROOT: /cvs/webwml Module name: webwml Changes by: joey03/07/30 09:51:43 Modified files: english/security/2003: dsa-354.wml Log message: Corrected the bug number. Where does the link come from anyway? That's my fault, I copied the code from an old report, but forgot to change the URL. Sorry! -- Regards, Kaare - http://www.nightcall.dk/
Re: Web Pages TODO List - Security
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:15:14AM +0200, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
* doug jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003-07-20 18:53]:
So, I will make those corrections and send the patches back to the list
to be commited, or bug reports to www.debian.org, or ...?
Send them to the list, IMHO no need to bloat the BTS with it. If noone
reacts you can still send them to the BTS for them to be more visible.
Uhm, on second thought, I guess Matt and/or Javier are doing a database
of crossreferences to vulnerability databases, they might be interested
in your changes in that part, too.
An email sent to debian-security, asking for comments from Matt and/or
Javier, received no response.
So, I'm wondering if anyone wants to commit the following three patches?
Thanks for your consideration.
# Allows the fixed in data to be displayed (for Buzz/Rex).
# Affects several DSAs in the 1998, 1997, and undated directories.
# This template isn't being used for current DSAs, last used in 1998.
--- template/debian/fixes_link.wml.old Fri Nov 1 06:16:30 2002
+++ template/debian/fixes_link.wml.new Sat Jul 19 17:26:53 2003
@@ -16,6 +16,12 @@
define-tag notapplicable whitespace=delete
gettextN/A/gettext
/define-tag
+define-tag in1_1 whitespace=delete
+ gettextin release 1.1/gettext
+/define-tag
+define-tag in1_2 whitespace=delete
+ gettextin release 1.2/gettext
+/define-tag
define-tag in1_3 whitespace=delete
gettextin release 1.3/gettext
/define-tag
@@ -41,6 +47,14 @@
if ( $release eq not )
{
$str = notneeded/;
+ }
+ elsif ( $release eq buzz )
+ {
+ $str = $arch - (in1_1/) $version;
+ }
+ elsif ( $release eq rex )
+ {
+ $str = $arch - (in1_2/) $version;
}
elsif ( $release eq bo )
{
## This change allows Vulnerable to be Yes and Security database
## reference to be displayed.
--- security/undated/1ssh.data.old Thu Apr 19 09:52:11 2001
+++ security/undated/1ssh.data.new Sat Jul 19 17:37:41 2003
@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
define-tag pagetitlessh/define-tag
define-tag report_dateundated/define-tag
+define-tag secrefsCA-1998-03/define-tag
define-tag packagesssh/define-tag
-define-tag isvulnerableYes/define-tag
+define-tag isvulnerableyes/define-tag
define-tag fixedYes/define-tag
#use wml::debian::security
# Changes to 1ssh.wml to add new data.
# Changed from what was in my original email (simplified).
# Note, there is nothing that absolutely insures that the new
# information is related to the original DSA. However, the version
# number matches and it seems to be related.
--- undated/1ssh.wml.oldSun Jul 22 07:46:50 2001
+++ undated/1ssh.wml.newWed Jul 30 15:53:08 2003
@@ -3,6 +3,13 @@
ssh allowed non-privileged users to forward privileged ports.
pFixes: ssh 1.2.21-1 or later
+
+pInsufficent permission checking may allow a SSH client user, to access
+remote accounts belonging to the ssh-agent user.
+
+pSSH versions 1.2.17 thru 1.2.21 are vulnerable. SSH versions prior to
+1.2.17 are vunerable to a different, though similar attack.
+
/define-tag
# do not modify the following line
Doug Jensen
