Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-31 Thread J.A. Bezemer
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Joey Hess wrote: > J.A. Bezemer wrote: > > > What about making a few task-* packages standard and have tasksel pre-select > > them by default? (I.e. start with [X] instead of [ ]) > > That's not a bad idea. > > > Another thing: will it still be _easy_ to install a small s

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-30 Thread Joey Hess
J.A. Bezemer wrote: > > It might be useful to be able to get these sorts of things back using a > > 'unix-servers' task or similar. Implemented now btw. > What about making a few task-* packages standard and have tasksel pre-select > them by default? (I.e. start with [X] instead of [ ]) That's

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-30 Thread J.A. Bezemer
On Fri, 18 May 2001, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > Here's a provisional list of packages which are standard or higher and > > should not be: > > fingerd not very secure for baseline > > ftpd not very secure for baseli

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-17 Thread Anthony Towns
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > Here's a provisional list of packages which are standard or higher and > should not be: > fingerd not very secure for baseline > ftpd not very secure for baseline > talk rather obsolete, but debatable >

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > You are assuming that talkd have buffer overflows, but you have no > proof of it. And talk is rwxr-xr-x, so what would you win by an > overflow on a local host? And I doubt that there are many bugs in a > daemon which is less than 10k big. Security works the

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Vince Mulhollon
On 05/15/2001 09:28:37 AM tfheen wrote: >> You are assuming that talkd have buffer overflows, but you have no >> proof of it. And talk is rwxr-xr-x, so what would you win by an >> overflow on a local host? And I doubt that there are many bugs in a >> daemon which is less than 10k big. Perhaps

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Michael Stone
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:28:37PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > You are assuming that talkd have buffer overflows, but you have no > proof of it. Of course a reasonably paranoid person would assume that buffer overflows exist and mitigate the risk as appropriate. Unless you can *prove* that

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
* "Vince Mulhollon" | On 05/15/2001 08:00:09 AM exa wrote: | | >> What about closing all the ports by default? The user can open them by | >> himself if he wants to anyway. Security fans would really be happy then. | | Still have the vulnerable, exploitable binaries. All you have to do it get

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Vince Mulhollon
On 05/15/2001 08:00:09 AM exa wrote: >> What about closing all the ports by default? The user can open them by >> himself if he wants to anyway. Security fans would really be happy then. Still have the vulnerable, exploitable binaries. All you have to do it get root and open the "talkd" ports

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Michael Stone
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 04:00:09PM +0300, Eray Ozkural (exa) wrote: > I sometimes have the feeling that too much security is breaking many > convenient features. It would be wrong to put in a program with known > vulnerabilities, but except that I don't see why you would want to > remove useful sm

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Eray Ozkural (exa)
Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > * Michael Stone > > | On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > | > | > talk rather obsolete, but debatable > | > | > talkd not very secure for baseline > | > > | > I want those. They are very useful, and afaik, there are

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-15 Thread Eray Ozkural (exa)
Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > Emacs is not `the standard editor', it is just one of the two most popular > ones. More importantly, we need an editor in the b-f that everyone can > use easily without having to know emacs, vi or any other editor. The first thing I involuntarily discovered in vi was

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-14 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
* Michael Stone | On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 03:16:53PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | > IMHO, a system without talk and talkd is too limited. Have it only | > listen on loopback, if security is the problem. | | That's YHO. I obviously disagree. :) :) | I haven't used talk in years, and you co

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-14 Thread Mark Eichin
what's the alternative, voting? :-) (seriously, I use talk regularly - "securely" even: two people ssh to a common machine, and run talk there :-) I'd probably be happy with any equivalent user-to-user real-time messaging tool, but "write" is kind of gross, and everything else seems to try to be

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-14 Thread Michael Stone
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 03:16:53PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > IMHO, a system without talk and talkd is too limited. Have it only > listen on loopback, if security is the problem. That's YHO. I obviously disagree. :) I haven't used talk in years, and you could probably find a large number of

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-14 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
* Michael Stone | On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | > | > talk rather obsolete, but debatable | > | > talkd not very secure for baseline | > | > I want those. They are very useful, and afaik, there are no security | > problems with talkd. |

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-14 Thread Michael Stone
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:08:17PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > | > talk rather obsolete, but debatable > | > talkd not very secure for baseline > > I want those. They are very useful, and afaik, there are no security > problems with talkd. This is about you, it's about

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-13 Thread Rob Browning
Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > `standard' > These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited > character-mode system. This is what will install by default if > the user doesn't select anything else. It doesn't include many >

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread kcr
Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > rcs few use it > replace it with cvs rcs and cvs solve very different problems. They are by no means equivalent, and I use both, and I know lots of people who use both on a

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Sam Hartman
While I agree there aren't that many people who use RCS directly, it is certainly one of those things I expect to be on a Unix system as a basic tool. I think you may break the expectations of people coming from other operating systems if you don't make RCS standard. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Marco d'Itri
On May 12, Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > vacation why standard? Because it fits the definition of "standard". Actually I think it fits the definition of "important" too, where it says "If the expectation is that an experienced Unix person who found it missing would say `What t

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wolfgang Sourdeau
> replacement for ae, which I think is a very good idea; nano is > *self-documenting*, which is the key feature for an editor we want to be > useful for all users. zile is self-documenting too. > I also don't think you'll get very far in trying to prove that most people on > d-d use emacs. I kn

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, 12 May 2001, Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote: > > "Bastian" == Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [1 ] > > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > >> aenot used as basic editor anymore, everyone seems to hate it > > what do you think to inclu

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Matt Zimmerman
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:13:54PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote: > > Another argument is that zile is "kind of" a stripped-down version of > > Emacs, and Emacs is the standard editor for the GNU system, which I am > > sure most of the people on this list are

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Adrian Bunk
On 12 May 2001, Peter Korsgaard wrote: > > "Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Sourdeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny > >> for boot-floopies? > > Wolfgang> I am just experiencing zile and I find it quite good. And, > Wolfgang> btw,

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Glenn McGrath
Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > aenot used as basic editor anymore, everyone seems to hate it > > what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny for > boot-floopies? > The editor for boot floppies does

mooks miss the point (was Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities)

2001-05-12 Thread Adam Di Carlo
You people are missing the point. I don't care if exim stays or not! I don't care who thinks what is a good editor! I wasn't asking for discussion on my list -- I was just throwing out the list to show there are things there which MUST not be standard (ftpd, telnetd). That no body had really

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Ilya Martynov
WA> postfix does not do IPv6 WA> postfix does not do TLS (not officialy and juding by comments on WA>#debian-devel from today not reliably either) Recently there was released new stable version of postfix. It does support TLS. AFAIK it doesn't support IPV6 out of box right now. There is exis

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Simon Richter
On 12 May 2001, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > libident why? not used by other std package, pidentd > rblcheck why standard? These are used by exim IIRC. Simon -- GPG public key available from http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pgp/Simon.Richter.asc Fingerprint: DC26 EB8D 1F35 4F44 2934 7583

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Paulo Henrique Baptista de Oliveira
I'm a simple user, I think after install Debian base, switch from exim to postfix is just a matter of apt-get install! Regards, Paulo Henrique Quoting Wichert Akkerman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Previously Jacob Kuntz wrote: > > http://www.postfix.org/motivation.html > > >From

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Jacob Kuntz wrote: > http://www.postfix.org/motivation.html >From what I hear: postfix does not do IPv6 postfix does not do TLS (not officialy and juding by comments on #debian-devel from today not reliably either) postfix header rewriting isn't flexible postfix uses multiple files

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Jacob Kuntz
from the secret journal of Drew Parsons ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Just for education's sake, what are the reasons you hold this opinion? > > I use exim simply because it came standard. I'd like to know why postfix is > better. > http://www.postfix.org/motivation.html Postfix is a little bigger o

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Sami Haahtinen wrote: > how does something become standard? > - Someone has to make new standards, why shouldn't it be us. There have to be good reasons to switch though. smail used to be our standard, but exim was clearly a better choice: it was a lot easier to configure and perform

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Sami Haahtinen
On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 12:42:01AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote: > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > > > Here's a provisional list of packages which are standard or higher and > > should not be: > > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO > > Just for educat

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Drew Parsons
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > Here's a provisional list of packages which are standard or higher and > should not be: > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO Just for education's sake, what are the reasons you hold this opinion? I use exim simply b

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
* Bastian Blank | On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: | > aenot used as basic editor anymore, everyone seems to hate it | | what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny for | boot-floopies? nano-tiny This has been decided alreay, p

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Paul Martin
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 01:13:54PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Emacs is not `the standard editor', it is just one of the two most popular > ones. More importantly, we need an editor in the b-f that everyone can > use easily without having to know emacs, vi or any other editor. I seem to hav

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Paul Martin
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO Whilst I agree with you on all the others. postfix is 3 times the size of exim, and a fraction harder to configure. (This isn't meant as flamebait.) -- Paul Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Wolfgang Sourdeau wrote: > Another argument is that zile is "kind of" a stripped-down version of > Emacs, and Emacs is the standard editor for the GNU system, which I am > sure most of the people on this list are using. Emacs is not `the standard editor', it is just one of the two most

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Peter Korsgaard
> "Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Sourdeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny >> for boot-floopies? Wolfgang> I am just experiencing zile and I find it quite good. And, Wolfgang> btw, it is meant primarily for boot floppies. Another

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Josip Rodin
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited > character-mode system. > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO Exim seems to be smaller and easier to configure. > vacation why s

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wolfgang Sourdeau
> "Bastian" == Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [1 ] > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: >> aenot used as basic editor anymore, everyone seems to hate it > what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny for > boot-floopi

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Josip Rodin
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 11:33:30AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > rblcheck why standard? > > exim use this? i don't know There would be a dependency between them if it did. > mtoolsonly usefull for dos users Considering of the number of DOS-formatted floppy disk

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Bastian Blank
On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 03:46:13AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > aenot used as basic editor anymore, everyone seems to hate it what do you think to include as basic editor? vim? and elvis-tiny for boot-floopies? > setserial rather inappropriate for non-i386, AFAIK also it is

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Adam Di Carlo wrote: > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO FWIW, I disagree, and I'ld like to see some really good arguments before we make a change like that. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting sign

Re: woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Alexander Koch
On Sat, 12 May 2001 03:46:13 -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > exim we should move to postfix, IMHO Let's not go over this again, but why change at all if it is working ok? We should all have better things than to worry about such things. -ako -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECT

woody release task needs help: package priorities

2001-05-12 Thread Adam Di Carlo
Woody installation (via boot-floppies, base-config, tasksel, apt) will change from Potato in that, normally, all packages marked as standard will be marked for installation. Citing Policy: `standard' These packages provide a reasonably small but not too limited characte