On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Brian May wrote:
On 14 June 2010 16:35, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Is there software that still
Why is it that suddenly everyone is an expert in double-stack programming?
Brian May:
For me, bindv6only=0 seems like an ugly hack designed to make existing
applications work without change.
Bindv6only=0 is a way to allow servers to be written to listen to just
one socket, which allows making
(cc's dropped, sorry, I was in kernel ML netiquete mode).
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh:
one probably has to mess with /etc/gai.conf
[...]
On a dual stack box and any application that does NOT work in ipv6only=1
mode, you likely have to
With bindv6only=0, a v6 socket bound to :: will not accept v4
connections, full stop. With bindv6only=0, connecting a v6 socket to
a v4-mapped address will not work, full stop.
That's obviously a typo -- I meant bindv6only=1.
Juliusz
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
With bindv6only=0, a v6 socket bound to :: will not accept v4
connections, full stop. With bindv6only=0, connecting a v6 socket to
a v4-mapped address will not work, full stop.
That's obviously a typo -- I meant bindv6only=1.
Then, what
On 14 June 2010 22:13, Adam Borowski kilob...@angband.pl wrote:
For me, bindv6only=0 seems like an ugly hack designed to make existing
applications work without change.
without change? Except, you know, the whole conversion from gethostname()
and friends to getaddrinfo()? V4-mapped
Sylvestre Ledru sylves...@debian.org wrote:
Hi,
It is not the case. The OpenJDK has some problems with font management,
slower with Swing and a few other problems.
However, I am not aware of software not working with the OpenJDK (ie
requiring the proprietary Java).
ISTR OpenJDK and JDBC4
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
upstream or ignoring the problem):
* wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
Debian package)
This won't work in some cases. Some native programs
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
upstream or ignoring the problem):
* wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
Debian package)
or
* allow sun-java6-* packages to override bindv6only
Jarek Kamiński writes:
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
upstream or ignoring the problem):
* wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
Debian package)
or
* allow
Am 15.06.2010 23:18, schrieb George Danchev:
Jarek Kamiński writes:
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I see only two ways of fixing proprietary Java (apart from fixing it
upstream or ignoring the problem):
* wrap java and java_vm binaries in some scripts setting LD_PRELOAD (in
OoO La nuit ayant déjà recouvert d'encre ce jour du mardi 15 juin 2010,
vers 23:18, George Danchev danc...@spnet.net disait :
they would be still inferior to those opening two separate sockets (which
means more fine-grained control like listening on v4 or v6 or both, or
establish means to
On Jun 13, Sune Vuorela nos...@vuorela.dk wrote:
You are taking the wrong approach to things. We should see if it is
still a major problem at freeze time, or if we have managed to fix all
the buggy software before freeze.
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
On 14 June 2010 16:35, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Is there software that still requires this proprietary Java
implementation?
Le lundi 14 juin 2010 à 20:45 +1000, Brian May a écrit :
On 14 June 2010 16:35, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Is there
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Unless the maintainer believes that we can get a fixed version before
the release then I
Le lundi 14 juin 2010 à 13:25 +0200, Jarek Kamiński a écrit :
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Unless the maintainer
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 01:25:11PM +0200, Jarek Kamiński wrote:
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
Unless the maintainer
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 08:45:58PM +1000, Brian May wrote:
On 14 June 2010 16:35, Marco d'Itri m...@linux.it wrote:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
There's no
m...@linux.it (Marco d'Itri) writes:
I believe that now we fixed ~everything which can be fixed, so this
leaves us with the proprietary Java implementation which apparently Sun
is unwilling to fix.
I think there are probably other proprietary applications that people just
haven't tried using
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 01:58:30AM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
I am very much surprised at the Debian community's passivity with
respect to what I see as a clear violation of Debian's commitment to
collective decision taking.
I think this is because you do not fully understand how
OoO En cette matinée pluvieuse du dimanche 13 juin 2010, vers 10:09,
Stefano Zacchiroli z...@debian.org disait :
Now, the above is used routinely cum grano salis by individual
maintainers, that before pushing big changes that affect others discuss
them first and listen to feedback of the
On 2010-06-13, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:
It is difficult to understand why we should wait freeze time to change
anything. Some people (including me) may be afraid that the problem may
not be corrected because of the freeze. Moreover, in the meantime, some
applications don't
OoO En cette matinée pluvieuse du dimanche 13 juin 2010, vers 10:59,
Sune Vuorela nos...@vuorela.dk disait :
It is difficult to understand why we should wait freeze time to change
anything. Some people (including me) may be afraid that the problem may
not be corrected because of the
On Sunday 13 June 2010, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2010-06-13, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:
It is difficult to understand why we should wait freeze time to change
anything. Some people (including me) may be afraid that the
problem may
not be corrected because of the freeze.
Sune Vuorela writes:
On 2010-06-13, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org wrote:
It is difficult to understand why we should wait freeze time to change
anything. Some people (including me) may be afraid that the problem may
not be corrected because of the freeze. Moreover, in the meantime,
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Michael Poole mdpo...@troilus.org wrote:
The behavior with net.ipv6.bindv6only=0 is mandated by both POSIX and
the governing RFC. How can you call it a bug for software to expect
that behavior? The true bug is that Debian intentionally violates these
Paul Wise writes:
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Michael Poole mdpo...@troilus.org wrote:
The behavior with net.ipv6.bindv6only=0 is mandated by both POSIX and
the governing RFC. How can you call it a bug for software to expect
that behavior? The true bug is that Debian intentionally
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
How many times will this discussion will go round and round in
circles? I'm getting dizzy.
I believe it will continue until someone finds the end of the circle.
Bjørn
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
Na grupie linux.debian.devel napisałe(a)ś:
3) There are potential security bugs if an application black- or
white-lists IPv4 addresses and someone uses an v6-mapped IPv4 address to
connect. (Handwavy and, as far as I've seen, purely hypothetical.
I don't want to blow the discussion once
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 01:58:30AM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
In netbase 4.38, Marco d'Itri has unilaterally decided to change the
value of the net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl to 1. This change has the
following effects:
(1) it violates POSIX 2008, Volume 2, Section 2.10.20;
(2) it
Le samedi 12 juin 2010 à 11:01 +0200, Bastian Blank a écrit :
Please start with fixing the FreeBSD kernel. It only supports this
mode of operation.
I agree this should be done, but why should it be done before changing
the default for the Linux ports?
--
.''`. Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`.
* Bastian Blank wa...@debian.org, 2010-06-12, 11:01:
In netbase 4.38, Marco d'Itri has unilaterally decided to change the
value of the net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl to 1. This change has the
following effects:
(1) it violates POSIX 2008, Volume 2, Section 2.10.20;
(2) it violates RFC 3493,
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 11:01:50AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 01:58:30AM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
In netbase 4.38, Marco d'Itri has unilaterally decided to change the
value of the net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl to 1. This change has the
following effects:
Dear all,
I would like to raise the issue of #560238 once again.
In netbase 4.38, Marco d'Itri has unilaterally decided to change the
value of the net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl to 1. This change has the
following effects:
(1) it violates POSIX 2008, Volume 2, Section 2.10.20;
(2) it violates
Dear Juliusz,
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 01:58:30 +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Dear all,
I would like to raise the issue of #560238 once again.
In netbase 4.38, Marco d'Itri has unilaterally decided to change the
value of the net.ipv6.bindv6only sysctl to 1. This change has the
36 matches
Mail list logo
