On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 08:49:25PM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 18:06, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > > > It's::not::like::this::sort::of::jargon::is::difficult::to::understand,::or
> > > > ::that::writing::package::descriptions::which::rely::entirely::on::one's
> > > > ::understandi
Convidamos você a experimentar gratuitamente a versão demo do
LOGIC LINE, a melhor e mais rápida ferramenta para o desenvolvimento
de sistemas.
Algumas características do LOGIC LINE:
- Permite o desenvolvimento de qualquer tipo de sistema,
não importando a complexidade do sistema.
- Crie rapi
Colin Watson wrote:
You haven't challenged it successfully, then; to my knowledge, my
statement is correct for the current base system, which is what it was
referring to.
I don't necessarily oppose tiny languages such as Lua, but perhaps
somebody should write the tools in question in them first, ot
Hi,
At Mon, 6 Oct 2003 20:41:44 -0500,
Branden Robinson wrote:
> > Debian JP Project reports to Debian Project about Japanese fonts
> > included in Debian archive and which has a serious license
> > violation. Debian Project should case for this problem immediately.
>
> debian-legal is a more app
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: trang
Version : 20030619
Upstream Author : James Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/trang.html
* License : BSD (with some Apache-licensed parts)
Description : Multi-forma
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 06:32:39PM +0900, Kenshi Muto wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Dear,
>
> Debian JP Project reports to Debian Project about Japanese fonts
> included in Debian archive and which has a serious license
> violation. Debian Project should case for th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Well, so far, it's "keep the extension", which is good as it won't break
existing installations and create confusion...
Thanks,
Paga
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:55:48PM -0700, Steve C. Lamb wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:50:07PM -0500, John Hasle
This one time, at band camp, Christoph Martin said:
> Hi folks,
>
> as of the latest update of libssl0.9.7 the postinst is able to restart
> certain services which use the ssl or crypto library, so that they don't
> use the faulty libraries any longer. I used part of the code from
> libc6.postinst
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:50:07PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Besides, if dumb names were a problem we'd do something about
> openoffice.org.
Besides, for people who work with Python they often see the .py extension
and don't consider it any more dumb than, say, .pl, .sh, .rb(?) and others.
Paga writes:
> What would be the best approach, to leave the program as "ask.py"
> (unusual) or rename it to "ask" (possibility of name conflicts and
> breakage of existing installations)?
Leave it. The program will be known as "ask.py" everywhere outside
Debian. Changing the name is asking for
On Mon, 2003-10-06 at 18:06, Richard Braakman wrote:
> > > It's::not::like::this::sort::of::jargon::is::difficult::to::understand,::or
> > > ::that::writing::package::descriptions::which::rely::entirely::on::one's
> > > ::understanding of::what::other::packages::do::is::uncommon.
> >
> > I really
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:42:05PM -0400, John Belmonte wrote:
> Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> >Because of how powerful is Perl? Because of the amount of things that
> >depend on Perl that currently exist and would be a waste of time to
> >rewrite? Because Perl might be the best tool for many cases? There a
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:32:20PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.06.2220 +0200]:
> > > I beg your pardon? Why do you believe that the _stable
> > > distribution security
Hi all,
I'm packaging a Python program called "ask" for distribution. Currently,
the main executable is called "ask.py". It seems unusual (and why not say,
*ugly*) to have the language extension added to the program, but in this
case, it was a deliberate decision to avoid clash with any other prog
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 03:58:07PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > Because it is the only thing I could find that reflects Debian's
> > > take on security fixes: feature backports are to be avoided.
> > That's because it's the posi
On 2003-10-06, Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
>> > Because it is the only thing I could find that reflects Debian's
>> > take on security fixes: feature backports are to be avoided.
>>
>> That's because it's the position of
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 06:04:45PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:30:45AM +0200, Oliver Kurth wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:08:57PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > > also sprach Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1109 +0200]:
> > > > Well, what you seem
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:54:09PM -0500, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Because it is the only thing I could find that reflects Debian's
> > take on security fixes: feature backports are to be avoided.
>
> That's because it's the position of the *Security Team*, and is
> certainly not binding on other
On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 12:30:45AM +0200, Oliver Kurth wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:08:57PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1109 +0200]:
> > > Well, what you seem to want is to have the kernel source avaliable
> > > in a format that ma
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:32:20PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.06.2220 +0200]:
> > I beg your pardon? Why do you believe that the _stable
> > distribution security FAQ_ is relevant to this argument?
> Because it is the only thing I co
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:08:57PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1109 +0200]:
> > Well, what you seem to want is to have the kernel source avaliable
> > in a format that makes packaging kernel patches easy. That seems
> > like a different is
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 10:41:47PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach martin f krafft [2003.09.30.1016 +0200]:
> > How do y'all suggest we continue on this, because apparently there
> > are two camps with different opinions, Herbert doesn't think he
> > needs to do anything, and this issue
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 04:36:50PM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 14:12, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > It's::plainly::obvious::what::this::package::does.Why::don't::you::pull
> > ::your::head::out::and::RTFM::once::in::a::while?
> >
> > It's::not::like::this::sort::of::jargon::is
George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sorry but this is not true and your documentation is misleading ! You have
> already known that your ipsec patch can't even be unapplied cleanly, and it
> is documented for kernel-source-2.4.22-2 in #213987... This is not corrected
> for kernel-sour
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 03:14:24PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> John Belmonte dijo [Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 10:20:59AM -0400]:
> > Lua is a modern high-level language. Its 15K stand-alone interpreter
> > depends on only two libraries which total less than 200K. The
> > functionality of its standard
Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Because of how powerful is Perl? Because of the amount of things that
depend on Perl that currently exist and would be a waste of time to
rewrite? Because Perl might be the best tool for many cases? There are
many possible answers...
Not that coding in Lua, scsh or similar tools
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.30.1016 +0200]:
> How do y'all suggest we continue on this, because apparently there
> are two camps with different opinions, Herbert doesn't think he
> needs to do anything, and this issue will just die without a change
> happening. I think
also sprach Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.06.2220 +0200]:
> I beg your pardon? Why do you believe that the _stable
> distribution security FAQ_ is relevant to this argument?
Because it is the only thing I could find that reflects Debian's
take on security fixes: feature backports
also sprach Andreas Schuldei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.06.2211 +0200]:
> > From glancing over the patch, it *also* replaces parts of the
> > non IPsec i.e. standard IP stack. Maybe it provides the same
> > functionality to the end user. It does *not* provide the same
> > functionality to the dev
On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 14:12, Branden Robinson wrote:
> It's::plainly::obvious::what::this::package::does.Why::don't::you::pull
> ::your::head::out::and::RTFM::once::in::a::while?
>
> It's::not::like::this::sort::of::jargon::is::difficult::to::understand,::or
> ::that::writing::package::descrip
also sprach Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.29.0232 +0200]:
> Hear, hear. IPsec in particular is long overdue in the Linux
> kernel and I am glad to see it.
It has existed in the freeswan patch for a while!
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. mar
On Monday 06 October 2003 21:11, Andreas Schuldei wrote:
> kernel developers dont use the debian source package as a base
> for their work.
I have in the past for writing device drivers. Admittedly none are in the
mainstream kernel (afaik) but that is not the point.
Tom
--
^__^| T
also sprach [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.28.0605 +0200]:
> That has more to do with the fact that grsecurity is an intrusive
> pile of garbage,
I'd appreciate if you kept your opinions to yourself, or state them
in a less aggressive fashion.
> Look, it's that simple - authors of
also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.28.0510 +0200]:
> For example, the grsecurity patch has had a history of conflicts
> with various patches in the Debian kernel source. Most of those
> patches that caused conflicts were in fact essential security
> fixes. You can review this for
also sprach Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.28.0209 +0200]:
> Would that then allow you to NOT include it in the kernel-source
> package, but then make it a "standard" patch to be installed by default
> then? And have a Variable "NO_IPSEC_PATCH" or something similar so that
> kpkg doesn't
also sprach Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.24.2214 +0200]:
> > make-kpkg and kernel-patches/modules work just fine with vanilla
> > sources.
>
> Except with --initrd.
I never need initrd if I make my own kernels.
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`.
also sprach Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1109 +0200]:
> Well, what you seem to want is to have the kernel source avaliable
> in a format that makes packaging kernel patches easy. That seems
> like a different issue to me.
No, this is the issue. I want the kernel sources to be what t
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 09:45:13PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1331 +0200]:
> > It is unacceptable for us to distribute kernels with known
> > (security) bugs.
>
> It is unacceptable for us to backport features alongside security
> patches
John Belmonte dijo [Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 10:20:59AM -0400]:
> Lua is a modern high-level language. Its 15K stand-alone interpreter
> depends on only two libraries which total less than 200K. The
> functionality of its standard libraries are limited by ANSI C, but there
> are are third party li
* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [031006 21:57]:
> > The IPSEC stack does nothing unless you specify policies through
> > PFKEY or NETLINK. In other words, it is disabled by default.
>
> From glancing over the patch, it *also* replaces parts of the non
> IPsec i.e. standard IP stack. Maybe i
also sprach Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.27.1253 +0200]:
> There is no good reason for the
> grsec patch to require a vanilla kernel tree, merely one that is
> slightly less patched than the current Debian one.
There is a good reason why grsec can require a kernel source that is
2.
Manoj Srivastava dijo [Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 03:42:02PM -0500]:
> Hi folks,
>
>It's been a few days since my last message. I have added a print
> style sheet, so one can use a free Browser (mozilla) to print the
> position statement. I have added a couple of new examples, an
> inchoate softw
also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1331 +0200]:
> It is unacceptable for us to distribute kernels with known
> (security) bugs.
It is unacceptable for us to backport features alongside security
patches. From http://www.debian.org/security/faq:
The most important guideline wh
also sprach Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1207 +0200]:
> Let's create a package called "linux-2.4.22" or
> "linux-2.4.22-pure-vanilla-source-for-you-to-patch" with a script which
> does exactly this.
I oppose. Let's get rid of kernel-{source,image,etc.} and provide
linux-kernel-*. T
also sprach Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.0026 +0200]:
> Can your patch file to be more modular like X package? It is
> a big chunk.
This would be a solution, but it would be an ugly solution. I still
don't believe that the grsecurity patch should have to unpatch even
parts of kernel
also sprach Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.10.03.1016 +0200]:
> > I cannot disable IPsec at runtime as I cannot replace the IP stack
> > at runtime, and it modifies the IP stack. Moreover, you state the
>
> The IPSEC stack does nothing unless you specify policies through
> PFKEY or NETLINK.
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:57:06AM -0700, Chris Waters wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 04:48:59PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> > On 2003-10-06 15:46:01 +0100 Eric Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >However, if you look at the logo as a component of Debian as a whole,
> > >and consider derived work
also sprach Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.22.1155 +0200]:
> > Me too - if we have to have significantly modified kernels, they should
> > be labelled as being such.
>
> They are - look at the last part of the kernel-image-KVERS image.
So 2.4.22-686 indicates a 2.5 IPsec backport?
> R
On 2003-10-06 19:57:06 +0100 Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A logo is a graphical equivalent of a name.
I do not believe that, either. The logo is more of a creative work
than a word.
As to your example, you should note that the BSD licence does not
attempt to enforce the trademark its
On Monday 06 October 2003 19:38, Bao C. Ha wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:12:03PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> Hi Herbet,
>
> If I want both the freeswan module capability and IPVS, how should
> I proceed.
You need kernel hacker skills to do that. Even if these patches both apply
cleanly eac
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 04:48:59PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> On 2003-10-06 15:46:01 +0100 Eric Sharkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >However, if you look at the logo as a component of Debian as a whole,
> >and consider derived works of the logo to be derived works of Debian,
> Surely the logo is a w
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 05:10:18PM +0200, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:12:03PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > You can either use a vanilla kernel, or unapply the IPSEC patch as
> > documented in the README.Debian file.
>
> Why is the ipsec patch applied by default in th
Re: Re: bug data mining [Graham Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mon, Oct 06, 2003
at 12:34:54AM -0500, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> for bug in $bugs; do
> if [ "`reportbug -m $bug | grep "^From "`" = "1" ]; then
> echo $bug
> fi
> done
s/reportbug/querybts/
Christoph
--
Christop
Only on a well-written OS... ;)
Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 01:01:52AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
Well-written C++ using well tested class libraries tend to do a pretty
good job, security-wise.
I often find that well written code does a good job.
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:12:03PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
Hi Herbet,
If I want both the freeswan module capability and IPVS, how should
I proceed.
Thanks.
Bao
> Bao C. Ha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I am trying to patch the kernel 2.4.22 and got into troubles. It seems
> > that the
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:29:38PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> as of the latest update of libssl0.9.7 the postinst is able to restart
> certain services which use the ssl or crypto library, so that they don't
> use the faulty libraries any longer. I used part of the code from
>
Hi, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> as of the latest update of libssl0.9.7 the postinst is able to restart
> certain services which use the ssl or crypto library, so that they don't
> use the faulty libraries any longer. I used part of the code from
> libc6.postinst. Currently there is on
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 07:12:03PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Bao C. Ha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I am trying to patch the kernel 2.4.22 and got into troubles. It seems
> > that the Debian kernel has been patched to do away the pmtu field of
> > the struct dst_entry (include/net/dst.h).
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:28:25PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working with Linux pthreads, from the glibc 2.2.3.
^^
That's your explanation.
Or, more precisely: this is a known issue with Linux Threads, and one of
the main reasons the new threading setup is so much nic
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:29:38PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote:
> [...] Currently there is only apache-ssl, ssh and sendmail in the list
> of services to be restarted. Please let me know if you wish more
> services to be included in the list.
postfix-tls and cyrus21 also uses libssl.
Gabor
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:29:38PM +0200, Christoph Martin wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> as of the latest update of libssl0.9.7 the postinst is able to restart
> certain services which use the ssl or crypto library, so that they don't
> use the faulty libraries any longer. I used part of the code from
>
Hello,
I'm working with Linux pthreads, from the glibc 2.2.3.
The problem occurs when I try to shut down my aplication controlled by
receiving signal SIGTERM. The root thread receives the signal and makes a
pthread_cancel() to all threads and waits with pthread_join() for cancellation.
But a t
Hi folks,
as of the latest update of libssl0.9.7 the postinst is able to restart
certain services which use the ssl or crypto library, so that they don't
use the faulty libraries any longer. I used part of the code from
libc6.postinst. Currently there is only apache-ssl, ssh and sendmail in
the li
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name: fastdep
Version : 0.15
Upstream Author : Bart Vanhauwaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.irule.be/bvh/c++/fastdep/
* License : (GPL)
Description : fast dependency generator for C/C++ files
The sugge
retitle 213467 ITP: gTodo - Gtk-2 todo list
--
Mika Hämäläinen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 08:24:51PM -0400, Peter S Galbraith wrote:
> This is heimdal.info, produced by makeinfo version 4.0 from
> heimdal.texi.
>
> heimdal.info-1: 210
> heimdal.info-2: 47804
> ---
>
> Yet the file is _not_ split in two.
>
> Why? I don't know.
Well, 4.0 is a version that's ab
Daniel Burrows wrote:
> (h) ummm, I can't think of anything else right now.
Listing the release (stable/testing/unstable or woody/sarge/sid) it comes
from next to the versions of a package would be nice.
Just my .02 EUR.
--
Kurt Bernhard Pruenner Telefon: 0732/2468-7135
Techniker Gr
On Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:31:08PM +0200, Robert Lemmen wrote:
> please do! dselect (whil ebeing verty simple and functional) has the
> most counter-intuitive user interface i have seen. the day i
> discovered aptitude and got rid of dselect meant a big step forward
> for my persoanl debian ex
Package: wnpp
Version: N/A; reported 2003-10-06
Severity: normal
Hi,
I intend to adopt the wmclock package. It is not orphaned per se, but
given the following facts I think it's up for adoption:
- according to debian/changelog, the package has had three uploads; two
were sponsored Maintainer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear,
Debian JP Project reports to Debian Project about Japanese fonts
included in Debian archive and which has a serious license
violation. Debian Project should case for this problem immediately.
* Debian packages which receive influence
o ttf-x
Bao C. Ha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am trying to patch the kernel 2.4.22 and got into troubles. It seems
> that the Debian kernel has been patched to do away the pmtu field of
> the struct dst_entry (include/net/dst.h).
>
> Any sugegstions on how to get it working again. The last working
Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Saturday 04 October 2003 02:25, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> [...]
>> I do think having a list of native DD names would be novel, at least,
>> but it would have to be manually maintained.
> Perhaps have DDs just put their name in original form in the
> c
On Saturday 04 October 2003 02:25, Glenn Maynard wrote:
(B[...]
(B> I do think having a list of native DD names would be novel, at least,
(B> but it would have to be manually maintained.
(B
(BPerhaps have DDs just put their name in original form in the changelog.Debian?
(B(Ok, I would want t
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:24:37PM -0400, John Belmonte wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> >Generally, I think people are using
> >http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/ and looking through the bugs
> >with ids lower than x. I think you'll find that the majority of older
> >bugs there fall into th
74 matches
Mail list logo
