Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 06:28:40PM +0100, Stephen Gran wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh said: >> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Adrian von Bidder wrote: >>> As I know it, the receiving MX connects the regular MX for the >>> sender address to see if *that* is ready to receive

Re: Bug#376521: ITP: kwlan -- wpasupplicant frontend for KDE

Hi, > As a user: can we please try to have wireless network profiles etc. stored > as far away from the gui as possible? No need for the commandline, gnome, > KDE, xfce and gnustep wireless applets have their own set of stored > profiles, when they're using the same backend logic anyway... That'

FINANCIAL PROPOSAL OF $32M WITH YOUR DEFINITE DETAILS OF INTEREST FROM JULIAN P FOERSTER LONDON

I have a new email address!You can now email me at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]FINANCIAL PROPOSAL OF $32M WITH YOUR DEFINITE DETAILS OF INTEREST FROM JULIAN P FOERSTER LONDON- JulianPThurston Thurston

Undelivered mail -- Rejected by recipient

Here's the story: I get way too much spam email these days, and so I've started using a spam blocker. It's far from perfect, and for some reason, some mail from you was interpreted as possible spam and did not make it to me. Assuming you're an actual real person reading this (Hi!), you will have

Re: cdrtools

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Erast Benson wrote: > On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 20:15 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > > NB: Please follow Debian list policy and refrain from Cc:'ing me. > > CDDL 3.1 requires that Covered Works made available in E

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > That's better than not greylisting anyone. Nobody is trying to > > design the perfect spam filter. We just want to reduce spam on > > debian.org. > > A perfect spam filter is one which catches all spa

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 02:39:00AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > In fact, broken servers which don't obey MX will _already_ fail: > > [ demonstration that debian.org doesn't accept RCPT TO @debian.org ] The issue isn't whether MTA's check against MX or A records, it's whether they check the IP th

Re: Bug#377697: New version of squid hangs at startup

This one time, at band camp, Luigi Gangitano said: > severity 377697 important > thanks > > [ I'm taking this to debian-devel seeking for broader consensus ] > > Latest versions of squid (2.6.x and 3.0.x) support the epoll() > function that is provided by 2.6 kernels. This speeds up seek > op

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 05:57:45PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Monday 10 July 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Another problem is with hosts that do not accept a message from an MTA > > > unless that MTA is

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >At least for the BTS, those messages are not discarded; they're just >separated out and processing on them is halted. Blars spends a lot of >time looking at "borderline" messages to put back in non-spam into the >queue, and catches most of t

Bug#377697: Info received (Bug#377697: New version of squid hangs at startup)

Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding this problem report. It has been forwarded to the package maintainer(s) and to other interested parties to accompany the original report. Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s): Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTE

Processed: Re: Bug#377697: New version of squid hangs at startup

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 377697 important Bug#377697: New version of squid hangs at startup Severity set to `important' from `normal' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator

Re: Bug#377697: New version of squid hangs at startup

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 severity 377697 important thanks [ I'm taking this to debian-devel seeking for broader consensus ] Latest versions of squid (2.6.x and 3.0.x) support the epoll() function that is provided by 2.6 kernels. This speeds up seek operations on disk an

Re: Mail rejection on size

Frans Pop wrote: On Tuesday 11 July 2006 00:24, Don Armstrong wrote: At least for the BTS, those messages are not discarded; they're just separated out and processing on them is halted. Blars spends a lot of time looking at "borderline" messages to put back in non-spam into the queue, and catche

Mail rejection on size (was: greylisting on debian.org?)

On Tuesday 11 July 2006 00:24, Don Armstrong wrote: > At least for the BTS, those messages are not discarded; they're just > separated out and processing on them is halted. Blars spends a lot of > time looking at "borderline" messages to put back in non-spam into the > queue, and catches most of th

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am concerned that you not use a spam-defeating technique which > > blocks perfectly legitimate and standards-compliant email. > > Then why you are not loudly complaining about the antispam sof

Bug#377714: ITP: avenger -- highly configurable, MTA-independent SMTP filter server

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: "Robert S. Edmonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: avenger Version : 0.7.6 Upstream Author : David Mazieres * URL : http://www.mailavenger.org/ * License : GPL, BSD Programming Lang: C, C++ Description : highl

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On 2006-07-10 Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Thomas Bushnell BSG becket.net> writes: > >> martin f krafft debian.org> writes: > > [...] > >> It assumes, for example, that the remote MTA will use the same IP > >> address each time

Re: cdrtools

On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 20:15 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > NB: Please follow Debian list policy and refrain from Cc:'ing me. > > On Fri, 07 Jul 2006, Erast Benson wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 08:39 -0700, Don Armstrong wrote: > > > On Fri, 07 Jul 2006, Erast Benson wrote: > > > > what? you thin

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm speaking about Debian here. We stand for openness, clarity, and > free software. We stand for the interests of our users. We do not We used to. Nowadays we stand for the mechanical veneration of holy principles. -- ciao, Marco

Re: Bug#377546: ITP: schedtools -- Queries/alters process's scheduling policy; supports the -ck kernel patch

On 7/10/06, Michal Čihař <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:35:33 +0200 Thibaut VARENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Package name: schedtools > Version : 1.2.6 > Upstream Author : Freek > * URL : http://fr

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I want you to be explicit and clear about which new rules you are >> writing into the RFCs, so that people can conform to them. You are >> making up new standards and hosing people who do not

Re: A question on setting setuid bit

LEE, Yui-wah (Clement) writes ("Re: A question on setting setuid bit"): > This is an experimental package that we built and > evaluate internally (up to this moment). The program > that needs setuid is a cgi-bin program that is invoked > by apache2, which runs as a regular user www-data. The > cg

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

This one time, at band camp, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh said: > On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > > On Monday 10 July 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > > Another problem is with hosts that do not acc

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want you to be explicit and clear about which new rules you are > writing into the RFCs, so that people can conform to them. You are > making up new standards and hosing people who do not comply; at the > very least you have an obligat

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes: > On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I am concerned that you not use a spam-defeating technique which >> blocks perfectly legitimate and standards-compliant email. > Then why you are not loudly complaining about the antispam soft

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Read below. When you do, please remember that many of us consider that a > fully-open system which drowns us in SPAM is also broken, because you do > lose information for failure of locating it among the noise. You may lose that informati

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Jul 10, Adrian von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > AFAICT, the protocol allows the receiving end to temporarily reject email, > and the sending end will retry. AFAICT QUIT is allowed after RCPT TO to > abort a mail transaction - and sender verification is no different from a > normal ma

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That's better than not greylisting anyone. Nobody is trying to > design the perfect spam filter. We just want to reduce spam on > debian.org. A perfect spam filter is one which catches all spam and bounces no valid mail. Saying "we aren't trying to b

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thomas Bushnell BSG becket.net> writes: >> martin f krafft debian.org> writes: > [...] >> It assumes, for example, that the remote MTA will use the same IP >> address each time it sends the message. > [...] > > eh no. Standard greylisting practise

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Monday 10 July 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Another problem is with hosts that do not accept a message from an MTA > > > unless that MTA is willing to accept re

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said: > martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Anyway, I'll be interested to hear a summary of their arguments, as > > Christian Perrier requested. I find it hard to imagine how properly > > configured greylisting should cause any problem

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 05:57:45PM +0200, Adrian von Bidder wrote: > On Monday 10 July 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Another problem is with hosts that do not accept a message from an MTA > > > unless that MTA is

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Monday 10 July 2006 06:58, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Doing sender verification and graylisting are both violations of the > RFCs. Which rfcs and where, exactly? Specific filename, version and line numbers, as Kimball would say it. AFAICT, the protocol allows the receiving end to temporari

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Monday 10 July 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky wrote: > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > Another problem is with hosts that do not accept a message from an MTA > > unless that MTA is willing to accept replies. This is a common spam > > prevention measure.

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Sunday 09 July 2006 15:48, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: [greylisting] > The point was about mailers sending mail to debian. If they receive a > 4xx they have to queue the mail and retry later. It's cheap for > debian, but expensive for everyone else. Does anybody have sensible numbers about th

Re: New LSB compliance list of init-scripts and guide for maintainers (SoC 2006)

Carlos Villegas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, a list containing the LSB-compliance to runtime dependencies of > init scripts is now available at > http://initscripts-ng.alioth.debian.org/soc2006-bootsystem/lsblist.html>. > Looks like it's not updated. I did a check in alsa package and its b

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 07:39:19AM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote: > Le lun 10 juillet 2006 02:17, Matthew R. Dempsky a écrit : > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 05:02:39PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > > Another problem is with hosts that do not accept a message from an > > > MTA unless that MTA i

Re: Debian Bug Tracking System

On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 10:49 +1000, Brendan O'Dea wrote: > >If I need to subscribe to a bug I can't use the web interface. > >The answer you might give is, "Oh! Send am email to > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > > This may be a simple way to add that behaviour. [snip] I filed bug #353260 with a patch to do

Re: Bug#377546: ITP: schedtools -- Queries/alters process's scheduling policy; supports the -ck kernel patch

On Monday 10 July 2006 16:54, Michal Čihař wrote: > Hi > > On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:35:33 +0200 > > Thibaut VARENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Package name: schedtools > > Version : 1.2.6 > > Upstream Author : Freek > > * URL

Re: Bug#377546: ITP: schedtools -- Queries/alters process's scheduling policy; supports the -ck kernel patch

Hi On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 23:35:33 +0200 Thibaut VARENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Package name: schedtools > Version : 1.2.6 > Upstream Author : Freek > * URL : http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/ > * License : GPLv2

Re: Bug#377546: ITP: schedtools -- Queries/alters process's scheduling policy; supports the -ck kernel patch

* Thibaut VARENE | Package: wnpp | Severity: wishlist | Owner: Thibaut VARENE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | | * Package name: schedtools | Version : 1.2.6 | Upstream Author : Freek | * URL : http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/ | * Li

Re: header sanity check?

Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tyler MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] >> 1. If you #include a header directly, you have to depend on that >> package. > [...] I guess you could scan for all directly used include files and then check with dpkg what packages t

Re: Broken applications: Could we be honest?

Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Art Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Unless such core pieces as the debugging tool (ddd) and the data >> display tool (xmgrace) are working, it is dishonest to pretend that >> the 64-bit version is ready for testing. It would be very nice if >> you,

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Jul 10, Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am concerned that you not use a spam-defeating technique which > blocks perfectly legitimate and standards-compliant email. Then why you are not loudly complaining about the antispam software currently applied to our mail lists and BTS,

Re: Broken applications: Could we be honest?

On Sat, 2006-07-08 at 10:09 -0600, Art Edwards wrote: > This brought up the question, who uses 64 bit Linux anyway? > Surely gamers do not drive the 64-bit linux community. It can't be the desktop > community, seeing that the standard office tool doesn't really > work for 64-bit. I've been quite

Re: Debconf videos (was: cdrtools)

Hi, On Monday 10 July 2006 10:20, Frans Pop wrote: > > http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/ > But most are still missing there :-( I am painfully aware of this. And I am doing and have been doing what I can do, which is not much (*). There is some light on the horizon now, so

Re: Debconf videos (was: cdrtools)

On Monday 10 July 2006 09:30, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 09:20:19AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: > >By the way, were can the videos be found? Last time I tried, google > >wasn't helpful. > > http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/ But most are still mis

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

also sprach Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.07.10.0930 +0200]: > >eh no. Standard greylisting practise nowadays (it already was > >standard when sarge was released) is to not greylist on host IP > >but at least on the /27 netblock. > > So you will whitelist the spamming customer in the same r

Re: Debconf videos (was: cdrtools)

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 09:20:19AM +0200, Frank Küster wrote: >By the way, were can the videos be found? Last time I tried, google >wasn't helpful. http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/ Best Regards, Aníbal Monsalve Salazar -- http://v7w.com/anibal signature.asc Description

Re: greylisting on debian.org?

On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 06:15:55 + (UTC), Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Thomas Bushnell BSG becket.net> writes: >> martin f krafft debian.org> writes: >[...] >> It assumes, for example, that the remote MTA will use the same IP >> address each time it sends the message. >[...] > >e

Debconf videos (was: cdrtools)

Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [See the video of the Solaris > discussion if you want to see someone talk about it; you can also see > me discussing this issue and others as well in the same video.] By the way, were can the videos be found? Last time I tried, google wasn't helpful.