On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:54:45PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> Mikko Rapeli wrote:
> > Could Debian security advisories help a bit, since the people making the
> > packaging changes propably know how to make the changes effective on a
> > running installation too?
>
> If there's anything sp
* Nick Boyce:
> For interest, can anyone explain why a problem with kdm leads to the
> need to reissue so many KDE packages ?
Security updates a performed on per source package (after all, we need
to ship an updated source package to comply with the DFSG and various
licenses). The source package
Regarding :
> - --
> Debian Security Advisory DSA 1156-1[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.debian.org/security/ Moritz Muehlenhoff
> August 27th, 2006 http://www.de
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 03:45:04PM -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote:
> I haven't come up with a really good solution to this problem. I
> actually sort of like the Windows method of incessantly nagging the user
> to reboot their machine (it literally pops up a dialog box every few
> minutes). I like t
Noah Meyerhans wrote:
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:54:45PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
If there's anything special to do (e.g. kernel or glibc) we alredy add this
to the DSA text.
I don't think that's quite enough. I have a few hundred Debian
workstations for which I'm responsible,
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 10:54:45PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote:
> If there's anything special to do (e.g. kernel or glibc) we alredy add this
> to the DSA text.
I don't think that's quite enough. I have a few hundred Debian
workstations for which I'm responsible, and it's difficult for me to
Mikko Rapeli wrote:
> Could Debian security advisories help a bit, since the people making the
> packaging changes propably know how to make the changes effective on a
> running installation too?
If there's anything special to do (e.g. kernel or glibc) we alredy add this
to the DSA text.
Cheers,
> -Original Message-
> From: Christoph Auer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Today I got this error message too
>
> W: GPG error: http://security.debian.org etch/updates
> Release: The following signatures were invalid: NODATA 2
> W: You may want to run apt-get update to correct these prob
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Reising [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 11:18 AM
> To: Hedges, Mark
> Subject: Re: apt-check-sigs and apt-get sig errors
>
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 10:13:40AM -0700, Hedges, Mark wrote:
> >
> >
> > T
> Like this. What does this mean? I get a lot of bad sig messages too,
> with key sigs that don't seem to be on any keyring. I get these at work
> and at home, so I figure it's actually the server, not a MITM.
>
> Fetched 42.4kB in 8s (4768B/s)
> Reading package lists... Done
> W: GPG error: h
> From: Hedges, Mark
> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 11:19 AM
> To: debian-security@lists.debian.org
> Subject: apt-check-sigs and apt-get sig errors
>
>
> Is apt-check-sigs supposed to work with etch these days?
> Does this mean nothing works right, or am I compromised?
>
> I get spora
Am 2006-08-25 10:16:17, schrieb Dominic Hargreaves:
> How are you doing your installs?
>
> The sarge installer, even if you deselect all tasks, installs all
> Priority: standard (and above) packages. This includes portmap.
I have only a 180 MByte installation after using the Netinstall-CD
and ha
12 matches
Mail list logo
