Re: Lenny banner on website frontpage ? (was: Debian Wiki Frontpage : Lenny's banner)

* Simon Paillard [Sun, 15 Feb 2009 08:38:24 +0100]: > On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 02:04:08AM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote: > > That may certainly come late, but having the proposed Lenny banner on the > > website would be great. > > The change is very minor and checked (in template/debian/mainpage.wml

Re: Lenny banner on website frontpage ? (was: Debian Wiki Frontpage : Lenny's banner)

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 02:04:08AM +0100, Simon Paillard wrote: > That may certainly come late, but having the proposed Lenny banner on the > website would be great. > > The change is very minor and checked (in template/debian/mainpage.wml > for all languages). Commited ! -- Simon Paillard --

Missing gmo files in pidgin-otr package

Hi, It just came to my attention that the pidgin-otr package completely failed to ship translation files along with the software. The fix is trivial (see interdiff below), I just uploaded to unstable a new package which solves this issue. I believe it's already too late to get it included

Lenny banner on website frontpage ? (was: Debian Wiki Frontpage : Lenny's banner)

Hi, That may certainly come late, but having the proposed Lenny banner on the website would be great. The change is very minor and checked (in template/debian/mainpage.wml for all languages). On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 12:49:09AM +0100, Frank Lin PIAT wrote: > Debian Lenny banner on the wiki >

Re: Whoos with GnuTLS and md5-signed certificates

Florian Weimer wrote: Yesterday several people started to complain that they could not longer connect to their ldap servers, many of them using pam-ldap and nss-ldap. A quick look showed certificates in the chain which was signed with MD5. Are you sure this isn't #514807? Also see #514

firestarter

Maybe we already in release time to Lenny, but check if is possible get firestarter from SID, because this bug[1] do it unusable (it desapear after sometime running). [1] Best regards, Renato S. Yamane -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Thomas Goirand wrote: > Luk Claes wrote: >> Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug >> report. > > Very simple: yum crashes with a not-so-nice error message when I try to > boostrap a CentOS complaining about the iniparse python module not being > present. > > I shou

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Luk Claes wrote: > Why is the python-iniparse also needed? That's not clear from the bug > report. Very simple: yum crashes with a not-so-nice error message when I try to boostrap a CentOS complaining about the iniparse python module not being present. I should have add it to the bug report, but

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

On Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:08:49 +0100 Luk Claes wrote: > Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a > > working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts > > of yum based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs. > >

Re: Whoos with GnuTLS and md5-signed certificates

On 2009-02-14 Florian Weimer wrote: > * Bastian Blank: >> GnuTLS stopped accepting MD5 as a proper signature type for certificates >> just two weeks before the release. While I don't question the decision >> themself, MD5 is broken since 4 years, I question the timing. > GNUTLS has rejected RSA-M

Re: SuiteSparse 3.2.0

* Rafael Laboissiere [2009-01-07 13:45]: > [N.B.: This message is being sent to the maintainers of all packages that > currently depend on libsuitesparse-3.1.0.] > > The new upstream package SuiteSparse version 3.2.0 is now in experimental. > When it will be uploaded to unstable post-lenny, the

Re: Whoos with GnuTLS and md5-signed certificates

* Bastian Blank: > GnuTLS stopped accepting MD5 as a proper signature type for certificates > just two weeks before the release. While I don't question the decision > themself, MD5 is broken since 4 years, I question the timing. GNUTLS has rejected RSA-MD5 signatures in X.509 certificate chains s

Re: CD/DVD image names

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 01:45:52PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 04:07:15PM +, Steve McIntyre wrote: >>As promised to various people, just a quick heads-up of the likely >>image names and layout for the lenny build at the weekend. I've been >>doing test runs today and th

Re: Bug#515132: debian-installer: source for version of dhcp3-client-udeb used in D-I not in archive

* Joerg Jaspert [Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:48:40 +0100]: > >> I tried rmadison, but that is/was broken: > >> $ rmadison dhcp3 > >> Traceback (most recent call last): > >> File "/usr/local/bin/dak", line 248, in ? > >> main() > >> File "/usr/local/bin/dak", line 243, in main > >> module.main(

Re: State of the release notes (was: Thanks to all)

* Praveen A [Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:49:51 -0800]: > 2009/2/13 Steve McIntyre : > > I'm going to be building CDs tomorrow. If you want to carry on doing > > translations for a little longer, it's up to you. Just please make > > sure that whatever's in place on the website at midnight tonight (UTC) > >

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Thomas Goirand wrote: > I forgot to add... > > The current maintainer of yum AND rpm (Anibal Monsalve Salazar > ) has been unactive for quite a long time now, there > are outstanding very serious bugs without even any reply from him since > 2006. We really need something to be done for rpm as well

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

I forgot to add... The current maintainer of yum AND rpm (Anibal Monsalve Salazar ) has been unactive for quite a long time now, there are outstanding very serious bugs without even any reply from him since 2006. We really need something to be done for rpm as well. I have contacted the people fro

Re: About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi, > > Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a > working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts of yum > based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs. Indeed. > Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum

About the current state of the Yum package in Lenny

Hi, Even though Debian is not RPM based, it's very important to have a working Yum package in Debian, just to be able to setup all sorts of yum based distribution in a chroot for setting-up VMs. Unfortunately, it seems that the current maintainer of Yum in Debian haven't been active for a long ti