Your message dated Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:43:57 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Security fixes for Pioneers
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Sep 2005 19:48:04 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Sep 13 12:48:04 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.enyo.de [212.9.189.167]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EFGlA-0006Fb-00; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 12:48:04 -0700
Received: from deneb.vpn.enyo.de ([212.9.189.177] helo=deneb.enyo.de)
by albireo.enyo.de with esmtp id 1EFGl8-0004KM-1E
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:48:02 +0200
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.52)
id 1EFGkE-00056T-2E; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:47:06 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: pioneers: Fixes from DSA-315
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.15
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 21:47:06 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
Package: pioneers
Severity: normal
Tags: security
Would you please check whter the fixes from DSA-315 have been
incorporated into the current versions of the package?
Thanks,
Florian
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 328136-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Sep 2005 20:44:31 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Sep 13 13:44:31 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp1.rug.nl [129.125.50.11]
by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian))
id 1EFHdm-0005nU-00; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 13:44:31 -0700
Received: from smtp1.rug.nl ([129.125.50.11])
by smtp1.rug.nl (SMSSMTP 4.1.0.19) with SMTP id M2005091322435712999
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:43:57 +0200
Received: from pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl (pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl [129.125.47.90])
by smtp1.rug.nl (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8DKhvST007689
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:43:57 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from shevek by pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl with local (Exim 4.52)
id 1EFHdF-0006mW-5v
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:43:57 +0200
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 22:43:57 +0200
From: Bas Wijnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Security fixes for Pioneers
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i
X-Scanned-By: milter-spamc/0.25.320 (smtp1.rug.nl [129.125.50.11]); Tue, 13 Sep
2005 22:43:57 +0200
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.1 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Would you please check whter the fixes from DSA-315 have been
> incorporated into the current versions of the package?
They were incorporated in gnocatan a long time ago, and are still present in
the current packages (which are renamed following an upstream rename, there
was no fork, in particular not one from an old version).
I just checked and found that they are indeed still there. Is there any
reason why that would be doubted?
Thanks,
Bas Wijnen
--=20
I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://129.125.47.90/e-mail.html
--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDJzoNFShl+2J8z5URAkzSAKCnuD/QyUpKdGRYYDpf3y6L8lOc5wCffj5h
9+52L2xMXeB88dTakRl3a5o=
=UOf0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--LpQ9ahxlCli8rRTG--
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
