Your message dated Thu, 7 May 2009 19:45:50 +0100
with message-id <200905071845.n47ijoyc014...@kmos.homeip.net>
and subject line diald has been removed from Debian, closing #179920
has caused the Debian Bug report #179920,
regarding cvt-pppconfig doesn't parse static ip addresses
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
179920: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=179920
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: diald
Version: 0.99.4-5
cvt-pppconfig doesn't seem to properly handle non-dynamic peer files. If
syntax like "localip:remoteip" appears in /etc/ppp/peers/blah, then
/var/cache/diald/options.blah will contain a bogus "speed" entry, and the
local/remote entries will reflect the defaults, rather than the addresses in
the peer file.
I believe cvt-pppconfig should be changed as follows:
The check for the speed parameter should be moved below the check for IP
addresses, or the regular expression for the speed parameter should be
changed from /^\d+/ to /^\d+$/ to prevent false matches to the ip addresses.
The IP address code should be something like this:
if ($keyword =~ /^([\d.]*):([\d.]*)/)
{
# IP addresses
$local = $1; $remote = $2;
if ($local =~ /[\d.]+/)
{
print "local $local\n";
$nolocal = 1;
}
if ($remote =~ /[\d.]+/)
{
print "remote $remote\n";
$noremote = 1;
}
next;
}
Among other things, this allows dots in the ip address.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 0.99.4-9+rm
The diald package has been removed from Debian so we are closing
the bugs that were still opened against it.
For more information about this package's removal, read
http://bugs.debian.org/526512 . That bug might give the reasons why
this package was removed, and suggestions of possible replacements.
Don't hesitate to reply to this mail if you have any question.
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
Kind regards,
--
Marco Rodrigues
--- End Message ---
