package azureus
tag 405997 patch
thanks
Thanks for the patch, Arron! I'm still unsure if I want to disable the
auto-update feature. I've found it useful on systems that don't
receive automatic updates other than security updates. If the
auto-update plugin is disabled in this way, is it possible
Shaun Jackman writes (Re: Bug#405997: should executables be permitted to
update themselves?):
It is only possible for the user to download the upstream jar and run
'java azureus.jar' at the command line if he or she is technically
capable of it. Presenting a technically-more-difficult
large icons in
the torrent lists)
Of course, patches to Azureus are also welcome :)
-ArronM/TuxPaper
Azureus Team wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Shaun Jackman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jan 16, 2007 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: Bug#405997: should executables be permitted to update
On 1/15/07, Jamin W. Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
After relaunching for the update the following error (not present prior
to the update appeared):
Error
SWT library loaded from /usr/share/java can't be automatically updated
from version 3235 to 3318 (must be loaded from
On 1/15/07, Michael Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
the user did not initiate the action. azureus went out and checked for
updates, then told the user that they should update. and it does this every
time the application starts up unless the user chooses to update (at that
point, i don't
Ian Jackson wrote:
I don't know what azareus's UI for this is like but depending on the
situation it might be best to make a configuration option, set by
default, which suppresses it. For example, if the current
code presents dialogues nagging to be allowed to update from upstream,
then we
Ian Jackson wrote:
I don't know what azareus's UI for this is like but depending on the
situation it might be best to make a configuration option, set by
default, which suppresses it. For example, if the current
code presents dialogues nagging to be allowed to update from upstream,
then we
On 1/14/07, Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
If azereus is going out and adding things to the users home
dir without the users knowledge, that would be one thing. But in this
case the users has initiated the action -- and trying to save the
user from themselves is not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Gilbert wrote:
is there a policy on whether an executable is permitted to update
itself?
Not sure about The Policy, but I can see a lot of reasons why this
should not be done:
1. The md5 sums will not match anymore, so one cannot
On 1/14/07, Linas Žvirblis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Gilbert wrote:
is there a policy on whether an executable is permitted to update
itself?
Not sure about The Policy, but I can see a lot of reasons why this
should not be done:
1. The
Shaun Jackman wrote:
On 1/14/07, Linas Žvirblis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
6. The upstream build may not be DFSG free.
Absolutely not our concern. It is the user's choice as to which
software she wishes to download and run.
And if the user selected Debian for its software guidelines? Don't
On Jan 14, 1:10 pm, Shaun Jackman wrote:
On a stable Debian system, system-wide upgrades can be far between. I
prefer to give the user a choice of whether to use the update system
provided by the upstream author to update the software before the next
stable release of Debian.
like i said
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:25:23 +, Neil McGovern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm not sure we'll be able to provide good security support if other
random things are downloaded.
Users can always download random things. They can download
sources and compile them. They can install third
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:51:22 -, Michael Gilbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Jan 14, 1:10 pm, Shaun Jackman wrote:
On a stable Debian system, system-wide upgrades can be far
between. I prefer to give the user a choice of whether to use the
update system provided by the upstream author to
hello,
is there a policy on whether an executable is permitted to update itself? i
personally believe that in order to maintain the security of the system, apt
and apt alone should be used to install software updates. recently i
submitted a bug on azureus about how it should not urge users to
15 matches
Mail list logo
