Bug#312897: ITP: texlive -- The TeXlive system packaged for debian

On Monday 13 June 2005 09.41, frank wrote: [texlive vs. teTeX] > Let me add some comments from my point of view (Debian teTeX > maintainer). Sounds like packaging texlive and trying to get it really stable would be the thing to do, with the goal of phasing out teTeX for etch+1 Not becuase I don'

Bug#313140: postgrey: [INTL:ru] Russian debconf templates translation

tags 313140 +pending thanks Yuriy, thanks a lot for your work, I'll include it with the next upload. cheers -- vbi -- featured link: http://fortytwo.ch/gpg/intro pgpZaTmw9Z0vR.pgp Description: PGP signature

Bug#312669: /sbin/ifconfig: Add ifconfig to user path

On Friday 10 June 2005 10.40, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Hello Olaf, > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 02:58:21PM +0200, Olaf van der Spek wrote: > > ifconfig is in /sbin and only in root's path. But ifconfig is runnable > > and useful for normal users, so it'd be nice if it could be added to > > the path

Bug#311484: apt-proxy doesn't like volatile

Package: apt-proxy Version: 1.9.30 Severity: important Justification: volatile will be quite widely known, see sarge release notes Hi, Might be #262528, but theres not much info there (and I can't fetch volatile even when I try again and again.) Please tell me if you need complete logs; on a qu

Bug#309515: postgrey: Allow easier setting of greylist-text (related to #298832 a little bit)

merge 298832 309515 thanks On Tuesday 17 May 2005 19.54, Sven Mueller wrote: > Package: postgrey > Version: 1.21-1 > Tags: patch > Severity: wishlist > > I patched /etc/default/postgrey and /etc/init.d/postgrey a little bit to > allow easier setting of the --greylist-text parameter (which almost >

Bug#308705: removing ipfwadm

On Monday 16 May 2005 23.27, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On May 16, Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am not sure whether the ipfwadm package should be removed. Kernels > > up to 2.4 still have support for ipfwadm filtering rules, so > > theoretically people could still be using it with curr

Bug#309499: postgrey: important bug

severity 309499 important tags 309499 +upstream thanks Sven, Thanks for the bug report - I agree, severity important is appropriate: an option that just doesn't work at all is Not Good(tm) You've probably already seen my email to the postgrey mailing list. Since the bug is not security sensit

Bug#309499: --dbdir option doesn't work

David & Team, Apparently, the --dbdir option to postgrey does not work currently (seems everybody is happy with the default directory...) due to the '-T' option to perl. Please see the report in Debian's bug database: Sven Müller who reported the bug also provi

Bug#308381: [l10n] Initial Czech translation of postgrey debconf messages

tags 308381 +pending thanks On Monday 09 May 2005 22.53, Miroslav Kure wrote: > Package: postgrey > Severity: wishlist > Tags: l10n, patch > > Hi, in attachement there is initial Czech translation (cs.po) of > postgrey debconf messages, please include it. thanks a lot, it will be included with th

Bug#308324: manpage is shipped as README, too

Package: libnet-server-perl Version: 0.87-2 Severity: minor Yo! I admit that this is a matter of taste, and you may want to close this. It just occured to me that shipping the Net::Server manpage in /usr/share/doc/libnet-server-perl/README.gz seems a bit silly - it is right there, in /usr/sha

Bug#304926: katie: policy URLs in signed changes/dsc files (was: Re: [installer@ftp-master.debian.org: latex-svninfo_0.2.1-1_i386.changes REJECTED])

confuses katie - the problem won't go away when ftp-master is sarge. gpgv 1.0.6: ./gpgv --status-fd 1 --homedir ~/tmp < ~/deb/postgrey/postgrey_1.21-1_i386.changes 2>/dev/null [GNUPG:] SIG_ID PLNKM40jZlGYRTzu4R2QiDcHHUM 2005-04-16 1113645917 [GNUPG:] GOODSIG 8BA4318BE5A7F7D6

Bug#304749: Fwd: Bug#304749: postgrey: remotely exploitable DoS vulnerability

On Friday 15 April 2005 14.03, martin f krafft wrote: > wenn ich bis morgen nichts von dir hÃre, dann kÃmmere ich mich drum. I'll package that tomorrow, ETA 14.00 +0100. Martin, I'd be happy if you could upload for me once more as this is urgent and I haven't read the dput/dupload/... docs yet.

Bug#303943: postgrey: Typo in manpage

tags 303943 +pending thanks On Saturday 09 April 2005 23.01, Vincent Untz wrote: > Here's something I can read in the manpage: > "(default: Greylisted for %s seconds + help url, see blow)" Ok, fixed in my repository. Thanks for reporting & greetings from Zürich -- vbi -- Hit any user to conti

Bug#297438: remove pdp11-unix-v{5,6,7}: orphaned, non-free

Wolffelaar wrote: > On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:33:06PM +0100, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > > So I close this (298030) bug and retitle/reassign the wnpp ones now? > > Wait any longer? > > d-d isn't usefully archived (that is, per issue), like a buglog is, for > lat

Bug#300988: postgrey: logcheck doesnt match some strange entries

tags 300988 +pending thanks > May i suggest the logcheck line is changed to from=.* (ie change the + > to *) Yep, coming. greetings -- vbi pgpbpZFrIVodQ.pgp Description: PGP signature

Bug#298030: The pdp11-unix-v{5,6,7} packages

Hi, You have previously done some work on the pdp11-unix-v{5,6,7} packages (previously simh-unix-images) - is there any value in keeping them? Kevin has recently orphaned these packages, they're non-free, and - according to popcon - barely anybody uses them. So I was going to file for removal

Bug#297438: remove pdp11-unix-v{5,6,7}: orphaned, non-free

Hi Jeroen, [removing pdp11-unix-v{5,6,7}] On Saturday 12 March 2005 00.00, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > Please don't file a new bug for this, but rather retitle and reassign > the wnpp bugs appropriately, Ok, shame on me, should've read the docs > prefereably by first mailing this to the >

Bug#298401: postgrey: New upstream version 1.18

Ralf, for $DEITY's sake, please allow me to take one breath until I check mail and jump to the next open xterm. The 1.18 announcement << Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 11:22:19 +0100 >> The bug: << Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:34:03 +0100 >> (I'm not categorically against filing wishlist bugs on new

Bug#296192: postgrey: ucf support and remove everything on purge

On Monday 21 February 2005 11.12, Martin Lohmeier wrote: > install -m 0644 -D postgrey_whitelist_clients \ > -ÂÂÂ$(BASE)/etc/postgrey/whitelist_clients > +ÂÂÂ$(BASE)/usr/share/doc/postgrey/whitelist_clients > install -m 0644 -D postgrey_whitelist_recipients \

Bug#296215: chown of /etc/logcheck/ignore.d.server/postgrey

On Monday 21 February 2005 03.12, Martin Lohmeier wrote: > Package: postgrey > Version: 1.17-2 > Severity: minor > > Hi, > > the file /etc/logcheck/ignore.d.server/postgrey should be owned by > root:logcheck as every other file in this directory and probably > chmod 640 as most of the other files.

Bug#296192: postgrey: ucf support and remove everything on purge

Thanks a lot, will look at it later. Can you resend as unified diff? I find these old-style diffs to be quite unreadable. greetings -- vbi -- Beware of the FUD - know your enemies. This week * The Alexis de Toqueville Institue * http://fortytwo.ch/opinion/adti pgpFmLboCtXKR.pgp Descripti

Bug#292759: shell script sniplets in /usr/bin?

On Saturday 29 January 2005 18.28, Frank Küster wrote: > Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > > On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, sean finney wrote: > >> why not do something like this in > >> any script that uses gettext: > >> > >> #!/bin/sh > >> > >> PATH=${PATH}:/usr/share/gettext/scripts > >> . gett

Bug#290276: RFA: alevt -- X11 Teletext/Videotext browser

On Thursday 13 January 2005 11.22, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Package: wnpp > Severity: normal > > I request an adopter for the alevt package. I've got rid of the > necessary hardware to use it. (TV is just not worth the tax/toll.) > > alevt is very little work, and upstream is responsive. I still h

Bug#290139: postgrey: Japanese po-debconf template translation (ja.po)

tags 290139 +pending thanks On Wednesday 12 January 2005 22.42, Hideki Yamane wrote: > Here's Japanese po-debconf template (ja.po) file that reviewed > by several Japanese Debian developers and users. Thanks a lot. Could you please test the package in - I

Bug#288917: Split out perl and python bindings

On Friday 07 January 2005 15.32, Joerg Dorchain wrote: > For subversion-tools, I suppose it could depend on a hypothetic > libsvn0-python package, which then in turn depends on > libsvn0-perl_and_C_only (without python libs) and python2.3. > If it's only one or two tools from subversion-tools tha

<    1   2   3   4