Bug#1018949: netkit-telnet: Drop in favour of netkit-telnet-ssl

2022-09-23 Thread Simon Josefsson
Bastian Germann writes: > Am 09.09.22 um 12:57 schrieb Simon Josefsson: >>> Just to be clear on this: There is one thing that you need to do to >>> enable clear-text use of in.telnetd: >>> It needs the command line argument -z nossl. This should be stated in >>> the telnetd package's description

Bug#1018949: netkit-telnet: Drop in favour of netkit-telnet-ssl

2022-09-22 Thread Bastian Germann
Am 09.09.22 um 12:57 schrieb Simon Josefsson: Just to be clear on this: There is one thing that you need to do to enable clear-text use of in.telnetd: It needs the command line argument -z nossl. This should be stated in the telnetd package's description on the last sentence: If you want to keep

Bug#1018949: netkit-telnet: Drop in favour of netkit-telnet-ssl

2022-09-08 Thread Bastian Germann
Am 06.09.22 um 16:16 schrieb Bastian Germann: I don't have a strong opinion on any solution, but I think we should be conservative in what we do -- it may years for people to realize civilization depends on a particular behaviour of netkit-telnet... Yes, but they still have that behaviour with

Bug#1018949: netkit-telnet: Drop in favour of netkit-telnet-ssl

2022-09-06 Thread Bastian Germann
Am 03.09.22 um 15:17 schrieb Simon Josefsson: Bastian Germann writes: Thanks for preparing the transition from netkit-telnet to the inetutils version. We can get rid of this source package by recommending the netkit-telnet-ssl packages on inetutils instead. Why have the same non-maintained

Bug#1018949: netkit-telnet: Drop in favour of netkit-telnet-ssl

2022-09-02 Thread Bastian Germann
Source: netkit-telnet Version: 0.17-48 Severity: wishlist Thanks for preparing the transition from netkit-telnet to the inetutils version. We can get rid of this source package by recommending the netkit-telnet-ssl packages on inetutils instead. Why have the same non-maintained upstream source