Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Friday 17 November 2017 23:42:19 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 09:36:46PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Friday 17 November 2017 12:36:54 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:03:26PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > W

Bug#878685: stretch-pu: package udftools/1.3-2

On Monday 20 November 2017 08:48:40 Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On 2017-11-20 8:39, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Saturday 18 November 2017 20:13:14 Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > Control: tags -1 + pending > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 17:59 +, Adam D. Barratt

Bug#878685: stretch-pu: package udftools/1.3-2

On Saturday 18 November 2017 20:13:14 Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Control: tags -1 + pending > > On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 17:59 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 12:17 +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Thursday 02 November 2017 21:55:54 Pali Rohár wro

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Friday 17 November 2017 12:36:54 Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:03:26PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > What > > about next, do you have some script or any other tool which can create > > those wishlist bugs for all packages which depend on > > li

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

for all packages which depend on libemail-address-perl package? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Wednesday 01 November 2017 23:04:24 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Wednesday 01 November 2017 13:59:53 gregor herrmann wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:36:03 +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > > On Thursday 13 July 2017 17:36:09 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > > I

Bug#878685: stretch-pu: package udftools/1.3-2

On Thursday 02 November 2017 21:55:54 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Sunday 29 October 2017 18:19:53 Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Please prepare an upload built and tested on stable, using "stretch" as > > the changelog distribution, and versioned as either 1.3-1+deb9u1 or > >

Bug#878685: stretch-pu: package udftools/1.3-2

ttach > the debdiff to this bug log. Ok. I uploaded package version 1.3-2~deb9u1 to mentors, it is there: https://mentors.debian.net/package/udftools debdiff between current version in stretch and 1.3-2~deb9u1 is attached. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com diff -Nru udftools-1.3/debian/changel

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Wednesday 01 November 2017 13:59:53 gregor herrmann wrote: > On Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:36:03 +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Thursday 13 July 2017 17:36:09 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > In particular as initial step we need a packaged > > > libema

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

ail::MIME. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Monday 12 June 2017 13:37:13 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Saturday 10 June 2017 22:44:31 Michael Biebl wrote: > > Hi > > > > Am 10.06.2017 um 21:14 schrieb Pali Rohár: > > > > > PING. Do you need to test something more? Or is that patch enough? > > >

Bug#878685: stretch-pu: package udftools/1.3-2

/debian/changelog --- udftools-1.3/debian/changelog 2017-01-24 00:28:05.0 +0100 +++ udftools-1.3/debian/changelog 2017-10-03 21:41:57.0 +0200 @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +udftools (1.3-2) unstable; urgency=low + + * Fix path to pktsetup in udftools init script + + -- Pali Rohár

Bug#877654: RFS: udftools/1.3-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udftools" * Package name: udftools Version : 1.3-2 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://github.com/pali/udf

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

display name or for company), plus we do not know if there are no other inputs which can cause that problem even with applied workaround. Workaround was mean to be just mitigation for temporary period... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Thursday 13 July 2017 16:47:34 gregor herrmann wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:21:06 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Thursday 13 July 2017 15:08:38 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > > This IMHO is no reason to mark it as severity grave. > > Debian Security Team sugg

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

On Thursday 13 July 2017 15:08:38 Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > This IMHO is no reason to mark it as severity grave. Debian Security Team suggested to add severity grave, so I did it.

Bug#868170: libemail-address-perl: Email::Address->parse() is vulnerable to CVE-2015-7686

' on sources of 3rd applications/modules should be enough. And if not, I can help with porting existing perl applications in Debian which uses Email::Address, to be compatible with Email::Address::XS. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Saturday 10 June 2017 22:44:31 Michael Biebl wrote: > Hi > > Am 10.06.2017 um 21:14 schrieb Pali Rohár: > > > PING. Do you need to test something more? Or is that patch enough? > > The patch seems to contain some left-over comments. Afaics it also > misses th

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Wednesday 07 June 2017 09:58:55 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 06 June 2017 11:56:45 Felipe Sateler wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > On Monday 05 June 2017 20:23:52 Michael Biebl wrote: > > >>

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Tuesday 06 June 2017 11:56:45 Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Monday 05 June 2017 20:23:52 Michael Biebl wrote: > >> Am 05.06.2017 um 13:12 schrieb Pali Rohár: > >> >> Am

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Monday 05 June 2017 20:23:52 Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 05.06.2017 um 13:12 schrieb Pali Rohár: > >> Am 05.06.2017 um 09:59 schrieb Pali Rohár: > >>> /etc/rc0.d/K08cryptdisks > >>> /etc/rc0.d/K09cryptdisks-early > >>> /etc/rc0.d/K10udev >

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

On Monday 05 June 2017 12:55:20 Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 05.06.2017 um 09:59 schrieb Pali Rohár: > > On Monday 05 June 2017 00:49:47 Michael Biebl wrote: > >> Am 03.06.2017 um 19:44 schrieb Michael Biebl: > >>> Am 03.06.2017 um 17:24 schrieb Felipe Sateler: &g

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

etc/rc0.d/K09cryptdisks-early /etc/rc0.d/K10udev So that fix is called *after* crytptdisks which is too late. cryptdisks-early has: # Should-Start: udev mdadm-raid # Should-Stop: udev mdadm-raid And cryptdisks has: # Should-Start: udev mdadm-raid lvm2 # Should-Stop: udev mdadm-raid lvm2 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#792552: [pkg-cryptsetup-devel] Bug#792552: still doesn't continue shutdown process

On Monday 29 May 2017 09:31:39 Guilhem Moulin wrote: > On Sun, 28 May 2017 at 23:41:56 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Sunday 28 May 2017 21:26:53 Guilhem Moulin wrote: > >> which as I explained in message #86 is due to /etc/init.d/sendsigs > >> killing systemd-ud

Bug#791944: /etc/init.d/sendsigs kills systemd-udevd upon shutdown, causing dmsetup to hang

, it is a regression when upgrading from Jessie to Stretch. Please fix this problem in Stretch. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#792552: [pkg-cryptsetup-devel] Bug#792552: still doesn't continue shutdown process

On Sunday 28 May 2017 21:26:53 Guilhem Moulin wrote: > Hi Pali, > > On Thu, 25 May 2017 at 18:23:00 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > > Same problem there. I have up-to-date Debian Stretch with > > LUKS-encrypted rootfs and system hangup on every shutdown or > > reboot. >

Bug#792552: still doesn't continue shutdown process

freeze. When I patched init script to call cryptsetup with -v --debug args I see there these last lines: # Udev cookie 0x (semid ) decremented to 1 # Udev cookie 0x (semid ) waiting for zero So it looks like problem is in cryptsetup and bug is still there! -- Pali Rohár pali.ro

Bug#862598: unblock: udfclient/0.8.7-1

Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian@packages.debian.org Usertags: unblock Please unblock package udfclient New upstream version fixes CVE-2017-8305 (Buffer overflow in strlcpy implementation), debian bug #861347. As protection for buffer overflows, package has

Bug#856250: libdbd-mysql-perl: Regression for zerofill columns

Per Gregor's request CCing perl team. On Sunday 26 February 2017 23:30:03 Pali Rohár wrote: > Package: libdbd-mysql-perl > Version: 4.041-1 > > DBD::mysql in version 4.040 introduced regression for zerofill > columns and since that version values are returned as without >

Bug#861406: RFS: udfclient/0.8.8-1

the last upload: * New upstream release. - CVE-2017-8305: Fix buffer overflow in strlcpy implementation (Closes: #861347) * Enable hardening. * Install new man pages. * Update debian/watch. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#861347: udfclient: Buffer overflow in own strlcpy implementation

-2017-8305 for this issue. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#849400: debian-installer: LUKS on rootfs and boot

On Tuesday 27 December 2016 11:58:53 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Monday 26 December 2016 18:58:04 Cyril Brulebois wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> (2016-12-26): > > > Package: debian-installer > > > Severity: normal > > >

Bug#451535: debian-installer: allow to 'reuse' encrypted volumes

BUMP again. This is really annoying bug which disallow installing Debian on pre-formatted disks/partitions. Any progress? Was Colin Watson proposed patch accepted? Or what is current state of it? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message

Bug#856250: libdbd-mysql-perl: Regression for zerofill columns

://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=118977 Patch which fixes zerofill attribute will be part of DBD::mysql 4.042 release and is there: https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/pull/75 It contains also automated test for verification that zerofill is working correctly. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro

Bug#853991: bts: Patches for smtp+starttls:// & Net::SMTP::TLS

Package: devscripts Hi! I'm sending two patches for bts to bugs as Mattia Rizzolo wanted. Originally I sent those patches to devscripts-devel mailing list. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com From 3178362c639d35c95682b822618d7d1361b9c8e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Pali=20Roh=C3

Bug#852636: RFS: llmnrd/0.3-1

ot change CFLAGS in debian/ruls (upstream fixed *FLAGS support) * Update debian/watch (upstream does not provide PGP signed tarballs) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#852504: RFS: udfclient/0.8.7-1

the last upload: * New upstream release. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#852371: RFS: udftools/1.3-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udftools" * Package name: udftools Version : 1.3-1 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://github.com/pali/udf

Bug#852370: override: udftools:otherosfs/optional

Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: normal Package udftools does not conflicts with others, so optional priority level fits better then extra.

Bug#848726: shebang preseed

become the default for DHCP preseeding, but > > otherwise I doubt it's useful enough to render all existing preseed > > files broken.) > > I support Philipp Kern point "avoid breaking existing preseed files". > > With magic can a preseedfile be identified. Result of the ID check > can (and should) be used in further program flow. Used wisely. > > > > > Cheers, Phil. > > > > P.S. I don't think that using #! as part of the magic string is a great > > idea -- it will make people incorrectly assume that there is an > > interpreter being invoked somewhere. > > New proposed magic string: '#_preseed_V1' Hi! Any progress on this particular problem? I fully agree that pressed file should be identifiable by either some magic line or header. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#849957: llmnrd: tidy up and improve init script

On Saturday 07 January 2017 19:19:06 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 01:47:17PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > [...] > > > [ ok ] Stopping llmnrd (via systemctl): llmnrd.service. > > > > You should fill same bug to systemd to fix their 40-systemd s

Bug#848036: closed by Michael Stapelberg <stapelb...@debian.org> (Bug#848036: fixed in libtomcrypt 1.17-9)

g> by replying to this email. It is still not fixed. wRAR on #debian-mentors wrote: [15:03:27] but the override wasn't changed [15:08:36] the maintainer should file a bug about changing the override as described on https://wiki.debian.org/FtpMaster/Override -- Pali Rohár pal

Bug#849957: llmnrd: tidy up and improve init script

ir 40-systemd script. I agree with you that non-systemd message is better, but systemd needs to be fixed first. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#849957: llmnrd: tidy up and improve init script

other cleanup as you wrote I can do... [1] - http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic.pdf page 852 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#849400: debian-installer: LUKS on rootfs and boot

On Monday 26 December 2016 18:58:04 Cyril Brulebois wrote: > Hi, > > Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> (2016-12-26): > > Package: debian-installer > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > Debian installer refuse me to install

Bug#849400: debian-installer: LUKS on rootfs and boot

should allow users to install system on fully encrypted disk (also with /boot) and should not force users to have always /boot unencrypted. At least expert users should be able to skip that error message and continue installation as error message is not truth anymore. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

On Saturday 24 December 2016 11:38:01 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 09:41:29PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Friday 23 December 2016 14:46:53 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > > You use DAEMON_OPTS in the default file, while sysvinit seems to >

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

On Friday 23 December 2016 14:46:53 Andreas Henriksson wrote: > Hi again Pali Rohár, > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:29:59AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > Now lintian on mentors shows warning: > > > > package-uses-experimental-debhelper-compat-version > > 10

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

ly disables silent rules when building > on buildds. Using Q environment variables isn't the normal thing > though. Even better than to explicitly disable silent build would be > to hook up Q to the automatic debhelper version (V=1?). I added export Q =. Looks like it is working with current Makefile. > > - Building in sbuild appears to work fine. > > > > - Package appears to work fine (though I don't have any llmnr > > > >device running at the moment, so I could only test name > >resolution of my own system) > > > > Regards, > > Christian > > Regards, > Andreas Henriksson -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

On Friday 23 December 2016 11:28:39 Pali Rohár wrote: > > > - debian/compat: why only 9? compat 10 is considered stable now > > > > > >and unless you have a good reason I would recommend that any > > >new package should use compat 10. (please read

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

Updated to version 0.2.1-1 https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/l/llmnrd/llmnrd_0.2.1-1.dsc -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848993: RFS: llmnrd/0.2-1 [ITP]

48880) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

On Wednesday 21 December 2016 10:36:30 Philip Hands wrote: > Philip Hands <p...@hands.com> writes: > > Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Package: debian-installer > >> Severity: normal > >> > >> Dear Maintainer, > >

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

On Wednesday 21 December 2016 10:16:24 Philip Hands wrote: > Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> writes: > > Package: debian-installer > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > > > > when DHCP server is configured to send bootfile option with i

Bug#848880: RFP: llmnrd -- Link-Local Multicast Resolution (LLMNR) Daemon for Linux

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist * Package name: llmnrd Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Tobias Klauser * URL : https://github.com/tklauser/llmnrd * License : GPL-2 Programming Lang: C Description : Link-Local Multicast Resolution

Bug#848597: preseed: handling non-preseed files

On Monday 19 December 2016 00:48:12 Geert Stappers wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:05:45AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Sunday 18 December 2016 23:56:30 Geert Stappers wrote: > > > The DHCP bootfilename in the second request, the d-i request, > > > sh

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

On Monday 19 December 2016 00:19:02 Geert Stappers wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 11:56:30PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:28:03PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > I know that they are two DHCP requests. Problem is that Debian > > > installe

Bug#827048: kopete+otr send messages unencrypted without notice

5 4:4.14.2-5 > ii libkdnssd4 4:4.14.2-5 > ii libkemoticons4 4:4.14.2-5 > ii libkhtml5 4:4.14.2-5 > ii libkio5 4:4.14.2-5 Hi! This problem is fixed in Kopete 16.12. Debian KDE team now needs to update Kopete package... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

urns different response). And for example qemu does not support it. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

On Sunday 18 December 2016 21:32:32 Geert Stappers wrote: > On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 08:33:47PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > when DHCP server is configured to send bootfile option with iPXE > > script > > > then debian-installer fails with following "red" erro

Bug#848597: debian-installer: iPXE script in DHCP bootfile option is interpreted as preseed filename

Package: debian-installer Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, when DHCP server is configured to send bootfile option with iPXE script then debian-installer fails with following "red" error: [!!] Download debconf preconfiguration file Failed to process the preconfiguration file The

Bug#848340: RFS: smpq/1.6-1

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "smpq" * Package name: smpq Version : 1.6-1 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> * URL : https://launchpad.net/smpq * License

Bug#848036: libtomcrypt: Change package priority to optional

ere any specific rationale for making it > priority: optional, though? > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Package: libtomcrypt > > Version: 1.17-3.2 > > Severity: normal > > > > Dear Maintainer, > &g

Bug#848036: libtomcrypt: Change package priority to optional

Package: libtomcrypt Version: 1.17-3.2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, priority of the package libtomcrypt is set to extra. According to policy [1], extra priority is for packages which conflicts with others. But package libtomcrypt0 does not conflict with other packages, see [2]. So can you

Bug#848035: RFS: stormlib/9.21-1

ezula.net/en/mpq/stormlib.html. Changes since the last upload: * New upstream release 9.21 * Remove static linked library from libstorm-dev * Compile without pie hardening (shared library is already pic) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#847721: RFS: netplug/1.2.9.2-3

dard version * Use debhelper 9 * Use hardening=+all * Fix spelling in changelog * Build only on linux-any Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#847685: RFS: udftools/1.2-2

Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "udftools" * Package name: udftools Version : 1.2-2 Upstream Author : Pali Rohár * URL : https://github.com/pali/udftools * License : GPL-2+

Bug#810392: fixed in 0xffff/0.6.1+git20160627-1

On Wednesday 07 December 2016 02:21:51 Sebastian Reichel wrote: > Maybe just report a bug on github? It looks like the issues are > actively checked there: https://github.com/libusb/libusb/issues https://github.com/libusb/libusb/issues/237 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signatu

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Wednesday 01 June 2016 23:25:56 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Thursday 28 April 2016 10:13:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-de

Bug#842599: RFS: igmpproxy/0.1-1 [ITP]

On Sunday 30 October 2016 18:31:39 Pali Rohár wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "igmpproxy" > > * Package name: igmpproxy >Version : 0.1-1 >

Bug#711763: igmpproxy: changing from ITP to RFP

I prepared igmpproxy package, see: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=842599 -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#842599: RFS: igmpproxy/0.1-1 [ITP]

(Closes: #711763) Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819396: closed by Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> (Re: Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP])

Package is fixed and reupload on mentors... I hope now correctly. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#832786: RFS: udfclient/0.8.6-1

upload: * New upstream release. * Update Standards-Version. * Change priority to optional. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

Hi! Now I updated package on mentors.debian.net. Look if it is better now or needs something else... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

On Tuesday 05 July 2016 01:17:39 Jakub Wilk wrote: > Control: owner -1 ! > Control: tags -1 + moreinfo > > * Pali Rohár <pali.ro...@gmail.com>, 2016-07-04, 18:13: > >dget -x > >https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/aspell-sk/aspell-sk_2 > >.02-0-0

Bug#829605: RFS: aspell-sk/2.02-0-0.1 [RC, NMU]

* Add Homepage and update Standards-Version. * Fix Coding-System in aspell-sk.info-aspell. Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#817360: aspell-sk: Removal of debhelper compat 4

On Wednesday 29 June 2016 21:17:38 Pali Rohár wrote: > Hi! Is somebody already migrating package aspell-sk to new debhleper? > If not, I can look at it. No answer for 4 days, so I uploaded nmu update to mentors.debian.net. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Descr

Bug#819396: closed by Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> (Re: Bug#819396: RFS: smpq/1.5-1 [ITP])

istfiles from Depends: to Recommends: as smpq can work without listfiles package, just is unable to unpack old archives. Also I added pgp check to watch... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

Ok, I added description about generation of files in README.source file. New package is uploaded on mentors.debian.net -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#829012: RFS: udftools/1.2-0.1 [NMU] [RC]

I updated udftools package, new version is on mentors.debian.net. Let me know if it is OK now. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

PING! On Tuesday 24 May 2016 10:51:59 Pali Rohár wrote: > Hi! Now after month, any news regarding this package? > > On Wednesday 27 April 2016 12:53:06 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > > Hi Pali and mentors, > > > > (redirecting the question to -mentors, because I don'

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Thursday 28 April 2016 10:13:51 Pali Rohár wrote: > On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-dev (libusb 0.1) package > > > in Debian repository, because

Bug#825105: RFS: udfclient/0.8.5-1

On Friday 27 May 2016 13:10:26 Andrew Shadura wrote: > I'll have a look. Now it is in sid: https://packages.debian.org/sid/udfclient -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

jected by ftpmasters! > > So, this point is really a showstopper for the inclusion in Debian of the tool > (BTW if you want to ask ftpmasters about their opinion let me know their > answer). > > I would like to avoid uploading and get a reject, but I would consider an > upload

Bug#825105: RFS: udfclient/0.8.5-1

upload: * New upstream release * Remove upstream patch Makefile.patch * Fix formatting of package description Regards, Pali Rohár signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

even when they are not used and needed? > > > you have to list *every* copyright and license on copyright file, regardless > of it being used or not. > This is a showstopper for ftpmasters. Done, now all embedded libraries have entry in copyright file. Package is now updated on men

Bug#810392: 0xffff: please switch to libusb 1.0

On Tuesday 15 March 2016 22:12:18 Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On 2016-03-15 21:26, Pali Rohár wrote: > > Aurelien, I would suggest to have libusb-dev (libusb 0.1) package in > > Debian repository, because it is stable and is working, not like new > > libusb-1.0-0-dev which

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

opyright file. That is all what I know and cannot do more. If there are or there are not law problems it is probably question for other people... -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

to paragraph then?? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

Now I updated stormlib package on mentors.debian.net. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

w :-( > >not sure here, I'm not a symbols-savvy man :( > >please ask on -mentors and come back if you have fixes for them... > > man dpkg-gensymbols should help there... Did not helped. Anyway, symbols file supports regex, so I added: (regex|optional).* -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

On Monday 18 April 2016 19:09:49 Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi > > >> 0.0.0~20150420 > > > >Ok, I change it to that string. > > as said by Jakub, 0~20150420 is already fine I did not get any email from Jakub. Anyway, now I updated stormlib-listfiles package

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

sk, but I do not expect any change... > otherwise, how could them notify users about new releases? Package content (or hash) was changed. There is not other way. Has debian/watch support for checking hash or Last-Modified header? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

" helps? And how to do that? Or better, how to ignore all symbols expect those which are whitelisted specified in debian/libstorm9.symbols file? > dh_makeshlibs > dpkg-gensymbols: warning: some new symbols appeared in the symbols > file: see diff output below dpkg-gensymbols: warning: > debian/libstorm9/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match completely > debian/libstorm9.symbols > > making makeshlibs sad is a build failure here! > > HTH, > > Gianfranco -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

version. Is that OK, or is there other convention? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

olate trademarks... But if you are interested for details, then read: http://zezula.net/en/mpq/namebreak.html -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

an-revision before. File debian/libstorm9.symbols already contains *all* public functions which can be used by other libraries. And all those functions do not have any debian suffix. So I do not understand why it show error message and even how to fix it. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#819395: RFS: stormlib-listfiles/2015-04-20-1 [ITP]

you sure there isn't any trademark violations there? I'm not lawyer. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

Bug#819394: RFS: stormlib/9.20-1 [ITP]

ision on symbol AsciiToLowerTable@Base and 215 others ==> What does this mean and how to fix it? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com

<    1   2   3   >