On 11/07/2024 22:56, Greg Wooledge wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 22:43:58 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
On 10/07/2024 20:55, Greg Wooledge wrote:
test -t 0 && stty -ixon
I have a question opposite to the original one. Is it possible to disable
xon&xoff for bash prompt, but enable it while
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 7:55 AM 타토카 wrote:
>
> And can you explain to me what is it, please? *
>
> $ alias | grep sha
> alias sha1='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha1 '
> alias sha256='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha256 '
> alias sha512='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha512 '
It's a way of getting sha sums for a fi
On 11/07/24 at 13:55, 타토카 wrote:
And can you explain to me what is it, please? *
$ alias | grep sha
alias sha1='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha1 '
alias sha256='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha256 '
alias sha512='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha512 '
Since you are asking this question maybe you don't know that
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 22:43:58 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
> On 10/07/2024 20:55, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > test -t 0 && stty -ixon
>
> I have a question opposite to the original one. Is it possible to disable
> xon&xoff for bash prompt, but enable it while foreground commands are
> running? S
On 10/07/2024 20:55, Greg Wooledge wrote:
test -t 0 && stty -ixon
I have a question opposite to the original one. Is it possible to
disable xon&xoff for bash prompt, but enable it while foreground
commands are running? Sometimes I use [Ctrl+s] to pause verbose output
of some tool. On th
On Jul 11, 2024, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 17:23:43 +0500, 타토카 wrote:
> > But, what do you mean: "Because you haven't established a chain of trust
> > from yourself to any of the signatures."
>
> Imagine someone walks up to you on the street and hands you a contract,
> which i
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 17:23:43 +0500, 타토카 wrote:
> But, what do you mean: "Because you haven't established a chain of trust
> from yourself to any of the signatures."
Imagine someone walks up to you on the street and hands you a contract,
which is signed by someone you've never heard of.
You do
Hi,
cybertat...@gmail.com wrote:
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
That's normal. The concept of a "web of trust" suffers from the fact
that most people which i know good enough to trust them in general
have no idea of PGP and thus are not really trustworthy in s
Ok, I think this is really enough for verification ( Maybe (^_^) ).
But, what do you mean: "Because you haven't established a chain of trust
from yourself to any of the signatures."
Is it only for Debian developers? And is it very important?
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 4:58 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 16:47:45 +0500, 타토카 wrote:
> Why 64 signatures not checked and no ultimately trusted keys found here:
> $ gpg --import key-DA87E80D6294BE9B.txt
> gpg: key DA87E80D6294BE9B: 64 signatures not checked due to missing keys
> gpg: key DA87E80D6294BE9B: public key "Debian CD signi
And can you explain to me what is it, please? *
$ alias | grep sha
alias sha1='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha1 '
alias sha256='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha256 '
alias sha512='/usr/bin/openssl dgst -sha512 '
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 4:47 PM 타토카 wrote:
> Why 64 signatures not checked and no ultimately t
Why 64 signatures not checked and no ultimately trusted keys found here:
$ gpg --import key-DA87E80D6294BE9B.txt
gpg: key DA87E80D6294BE9B: 64 signatures not checked due to missing keys
gpg: key DA87E80D6294BE9B: public key "Debian CD signing key
" imported
gpg: Total number processed: 1
gpg:
Ciao Michael,
simply the old-style /etc/init.d "start" that you show in your
post did not suffice.
I do note that you seem to have a mix of TCP ports here; both 80, 8080
(in the requested URL) and 8090 (in the podman invocation).
After your email, I double checked and I reported wrongly the p
songbird (12024-07-10):
> but for my own purposes i also like to do things for
> terminals when they open up (my session manager and the
> overall desktop will store multiple desktops and all of
> the terminals i have open in each of them when i ask it
> to).
This is absolutely legitimate.
Note
Hi,
Max Nikulin wrote:
> Thomas, do you have in your collection of strange files a one moved out of a
> directory encrypted using fscrypt?
Not yet. I will have to think whether such files pose any particular
backup problem.
Have a nice day :)
Thomas
15 matches
Mail list logo
