Could you close this bug or downgrade its severity, or do whatever it
takes so that this *isn't* removed from bullseye? Removing this
package from the bullseye release would cause large problems.
Many people run Debian on different kernels. Therefore the dkms remains
useful and should not be removed.
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 12:02:59AM +0300, Tim Mohlmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > So for wireguard's purposes, it would be good to figure out how to get
> > some debian package that ships the symlink in question (i understand why
> > you can't ship the symlink by default in the systemd package -- it
On Fri, 1 May 2020 15:30:40 + Luca Filipozzi wrote:
> The changes made do not address the bug, I'm afraid. wireguard-dkms
> fails to install because kernel-image 4.19.0-9 includes a backported
> change that is not caught by the pragmas in compat.h. This backport
> might be a Debian-ism that
https://git.zx2c4.com/wireguard-linux-compat/commit/?id=4602590adee92557847e61c8cd14445d35fbfa2e
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/wireguard-linux-compat/-/merge_requests/7
Thanks! Looks good to me. I appreciate that you were able to
reconstruct the original upstream commits for each of these.
(WireGuard has a capital G btw.)
Hi again,
It looks like you didn't actually take these patches from the updated
tree I sent you, but rather used the outdated .zip I had posted prior.
Please try again using the tree I linked earlier:
https://git.zx2c4.com/wireguard-linux/log/?h=backport-5.5.y
Thanks,
Jason
On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:18 PM Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2020-03-21 at 03:21 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 22:23 -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:52 PM Ben Hutchings
> > > wrote:
> > > >
Hi Ben,
I continue to maintain and keep up to date the 5.5.y backport for
WireGuard for you. I don't know when you intend on merging this --
after 5.6 drops, I assume -- but I've updated the patches and I'm now
holding them in the wireguard-linux repo:
By the way, do you want a patch series for 5.4 too? I can provide that as well.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 8:52 PM Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2020-03-10 at 17:02 -0600, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > Please coordinate with me for doing this. Actually, if this sounds
> > interesting to you, I'll backport it myself, along with the missing
> > crypto/
Please coordinate with me for doing this. Actually, if this sounds
interesting to you, I'll backport it myself, along with the missing
crypto/ bits, and send you a git bundle of patches for 5.5.
In other words, just say "yes please", and I'll supply the rest. Then
you can apply this to your tree
I'm not sure doing this by default is a good choice. Seems like this sort
of thing -- disrupting everybody's interfaces and particular configurations
-- should be opt-in rather than opt-out. Trying to (ab)use the wireguard
metapackage as a "switch" for this seems suboptimal. People want the
To further summarize ongoing conversations:
It appears that there many be another alternative, midway between the
two extremes of stabilization on one hand and keeping this bug report
open on the other. The idea is to ship WireGuard in stable-backports
and in unstable, but not let this migrate to
dkg and I had a discussion about this recently and he asked me to
summarize my understanding of it.
- WireGuard still prefers to operate on a rolling basis, with new
snapshots totally replacing old ones, with no stability, security, or
other long term guarantees.
- WireGuard probably won't be
Sorry, a small typo:
The openresolv package already "Provides: resolvconf", so it should be
a drop-in replacement.
This would be accomplished by the recommendation in #860564.
Package: resolvconf
Debian has its own "resolvconf" which is vastly inferior and makes it
impossible to securely set up DNS servers for ephemeral secure tunnel
interfaces.
Specifically, Debian's "resolvconf" relies on a hard coded list of
interface templates. For virtual interfaces or renamed
If anybody would like to take over my lualdap fork, I'd be happy to
transfer commit access.
https://git.zx2c4.com/lualdap
---
The previous dff I sent got screwed up by line wrapping,
so here's one directly from git that should apply cleanly
into the repository.
debian/wireguard-dkms.install | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/debian/wireguard-dkms.install
The following patch should fix the package:
diff -ru debian-orig/wireguard-dkms.install debian/wireguard-dkms.install
--- debian-orig/wireguard-dkms.install 2016-08-08 22:52:04.0 +0200
+++ debian/wireguard-dkms.install 2016-08-11 17:47:12.569366878 +0200
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
Debian and all sane distros should revert this commit at once.
Changing the aesthetic of ls output is ugly, confusing, and completely
absurd. The developer who made the commit should think twice next time
before introducing such an unwanted setting and making it the default.
This is a change
Excuse the ignorance if this suggestion winds up being not any
different from Ian's current proposal, due to the specifics of the
Condorcet method. But in case it is, it strikes me that coupling the
multiple vote with the init vote allows for more voting options,
and thus the potential for an
Was this bug ever fixed upstream? I'm still experiencing it...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Access granted. Go ahead and push this yourself.
pass insert -n name
or
pass insert --no-echo name
See the man page for all options.
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote:
I didn't notice this option, but I think it would be a good idea to flip
the default to disabling keyboard echo.
I'll consider this for the next release.
Anyone on the list have opinions about this? Specifically this would be:
http://git.zx2c4.com/password-store/commit/?id=94d9b4390f7b0a01b6aa6ad91439570b7cbef967
Unfortunately, I'm not really well equipped to be a debian developer
or maintainer, and was hoping someone here from bugzilla could inspect
the packaging work I've already done and adopt it for themselves. Any
kind souls out there available to lend a helping hand?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 7:10 PM, martin f krafft madd...@debian.org wrote:
also sprach Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com [2012.09.08.1852 +0200]:
Anyone up for discussing adding this package to debian?
Have you considered doing it yourself?
I've already written the debian control files
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Thibaut Paumard
paum...@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
the short description is misleading: this new tool (as neat as it may
be) is by no means standard (yet?).
This has already been discussed and the name has been changed. The
name referred to the fact that it
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-de...@lists.debian.org
pass is a small utility that allows managing a normal folder hierarchy
of gpg'd text files containing passwords. It can generate new
passwords using pwgen, keep a log using git, and interface with the X
clipboard using
What I meant is that it uses standard unix tools to achieve its aim
(versus implementing some behemoth of a database format like all other
password managers to date).
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Makes sense. I'll try to change the name of this bug report. One
second while I wrangle control@b.d.o.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
I tried do this:
retitle 686903 RFP: pass -- simple password manager that stores,
retrieves, generates, and synchronizes passwords using gpg, pwgen,
git, and other standard utilities
But evidently control@b.d.o. doesn't like the line breaks, so I'm not
sure how to relabel it to something more
36 matches
Mail list logo
