Am Freitag, 20. August 2021, 18:55:44 CEST schrieb Brian:
Yeah, looks like we woke a sleeping dog up. :)
Best
Hans
> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:51:19 +0200, Hans wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> > Yes, you are very right!
> >
> > > There isn't any such thing
On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:51:19 +0200, Hans wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> Yes, you are very right!
> >
> > There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> > technical matters :).
Other may have been listening in to us [1]. One never
On Mon 16 Aug 2021 at 15:16:35 +0100, Brian wrote:
[...]
> My conclusion is that the line in ยง 5.1.3 in the Release Notes is
> either an overenthusiastic entry or a typo. Either way the advice
> there should really be consistent with what the installer does,
> even if it does not lead to any
On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 09:52:01 -0500, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 15:36:05 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> > On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security
> > > much.
> > >
> > > I just wondered, why
Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 18:15:36 CEST schrieb Frank:
Yes, this was a typo, sorry for that.
Best
Hans
> Op 15-08-2021 om 18:01 schreef Hans:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the
> > mirrors.
> >
> > I changed from ftp.de.debian.org
Op 15-08-2021 om 18:01 schreef Hans:
Hi all,
discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the
mirrors.
I changed from ftp.de.debian.org to deb.debian.org, and all is working like a
charm.
So, I suppose, this issue might be solved.
But it would be nice to add a package
Hi all,
discovered something. It looks like the keys are still not synced to the
mirrors.
I changed from ftp.de.debian.org to deb.debian.org, and all is working like a
charm.
So, I suppose, this issue might be solved.
But it would be nice to add a package with the actual keys into the
Yes, but did not work.
Strangely, the entry for bullseye-security seem to work (as there is an
existing key).
Best
Hans
> Have you tried adding *[trusted=yes]* inside the sources.list file that
> contain reference to this repository.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
Op 15-08-2021 om 16:51 schreef Hans:
Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
Yes, you are very right!
There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
technical matters :).
A link to the page you were looking at might help.
To everyone:
I have still the
On 2021-08-15 10:51 a.m., Hans wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
> Yes, you are very right!
>>
>> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
>> technical matters :).
>>
>> A link to the page you were looking at might help.
>
> To
On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 15:36:05 (+0100), Brian wrote:
> On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:
>
> > Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security
> > much.
> >
> > I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http".
> > If
> > only
Am Sonntag, 15. August 2021, 16:36:05 CEST schrieb Brian:
Yes, you are very right!
>
> There isn't any such thing as being "too critical" when it comes to
> technical matters :).
>
> A link to the page you were looking at might help.
To everyone:
I have still the problem, that the
On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 16:13:51 +0200, Hans wrote:
> Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.
>
> I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If
> only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.
>
> Looks
Yeah, not quite. I was already aware, that https won't improve security much.
I just wondered, why the docu once is telling "use https" and once "http". If
only using https or either http, this would not create confuseness.
Looks like I am too critical. am I not? :)
Best regards
Hans
>
On Sun 15 Aug 2021 at 11:36:54 +0200, Hans wrote:
[...]
> Another thing besides this: I am wondering, why the debian documentation
> differs
> between http and https at the entries for the security and the normal
> packages. I would have been expected, that all entries are using https, and
>
Hi Eike,
it is not that easy and sadly this does not work. I copied the Release.gpg to
/etc/apt/
trusted.gpg.d/ and renamed it to "debian-archive-bullseye-stable.gpg".
I also get lots of errors, since bullseye chaged something. Please see:
snip
* 2021-08-15 11:36:54+0200, Hans wrote:
> 2. deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
> is not reachable.
When upgrading a Debian system you should always read the release notes.
https://www.debian.org/releases/bullseye/amd64/release-notes/
Section 4.2.7 says:
On Sonntag, 15. August 2021 05:36:54 -04 Hans wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> since the release of bullseye I got into two issues.
>
> 1. the pgp-key of the repo are no more valid.
>
> Is there a new one? How to get?
>
> 2. deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib
> non-free is not
Dear list,
since the release of bullseye I got into two issues.
1. the pgp-key of the repo are no more valid.
Is there a new one? How to get?
2. deb http://security.debian.org/ stable/updates main contrib non-free
is not reachable.
Is it down? How can it be fixed?
Another thing besides
19 matches
Mail list logo
