The tcpd/paranoid-mode debconf key enables a "default deny"
configuration for tcpd. Does anybody use it?
I think it should be removed to simplify the package and reduce
confusions (many services nowadays are not subject to libwrap's
access control).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Di
On Jul 06, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Some a11y people asked how to very easily remaster ISOs so as to append
> parameters to the kernel command line, to e.g. setup the braille
> configuration once for good before burning a CD. I've prepared a small
> crude script to do that on
This begs for a simp
On Jul 28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> " Insserv will become essential together with sysv-rc, and is not
> supposed to be simple to remove any more. Dependency based boot
> sequencing is going to become the default and suppoted boot sequencing
> method. I'll remove the option to disable it. "
This i
On Jul 28, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
> - squeeze+1: true upstart: move all scripts to a event based system
How do you plan to remove insserv once it becomes essential?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Aug 11, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> - How to handle the common case: keyboard is already attached
> (daemon is in /usr filesystem), with udev.
cd /lib/udev/
. ./hotplug.functions
wait_for_file /dev/log
> - How to load uinput module? Actually I modprobe and I pool
I expect that it woul
On Aug 11, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> uinput is "input from userspace", so no hardware.
> But probably CONFIG_INPUT_UINPUT must be set "y" on debian kernels.
This is not so obvious. Looks like you should load the module from the
init script (and please do not bother removing it on shutdown,
glib: do not run udev-acl unless glib is
* installed.
* Stop copying /etc/udev/rules.d/ in the initramfs.
* Renamed some rules files for uniformity with other distributions:
50-udev.rules => 50-udev-default.rules,
95-late.rules => 95-udev-late.rules.
-- Marco d'Itri
On Aug 26, "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" wrote:
> 5) We create a new free database.
> I don't think is too difficult, and I think we would have support
Sure, a database which can associate an IP address with a country 90% of
the time will be easy to create and if widely used in a few years maybe
will be
On Aug 31, Bastian Blank wrote:
> I doubt that I would be able to push this port through another release
> in the current state. The consequence would by that the port dies
> completely and with it the only free and released distribution for this
> machines.
Is this really an important problem?
D
On May 31, md wrote:
> The issue was raised by the udev upstream maintainer along with the udev
> package maintainers of the major distributions, who all agreed that this
> configuration is not supported.
FYI, udev 146 ships usb-id and pci-id programs which read
/usr/share/misc/usb.ids and /usr/sh
On Sep 01, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Wouldn't make it sense then if udev had a recommends or at least suggests for
> usbutils and pciutils?
Yes, the next upload (today in experimental maybe) will do this.
> How will usb-id and pci-id behave, if the ids files are not accessible?
Print an error on st
On Sep 01, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> How about re-running the rules after all the filesystems have been
> mounted?
No.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 01, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Why do programs need udev to read this information in at driver load time?
> Why can't packages that need this information query it when they need it
> (which is well after /usr is mounted), instead of expecting udev to provide
> it?
I did not design this aspect
On Sep 03, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Posting to debian-devel too. Please comment.
Don't do this. gnupg is 5 MB big, if we keep increasing the size of the
root file system what is the point of supporting a standalone /usr/?
Using cryptsetup+gnupg for /usr is a niche configuration of an already
niche
On Sep 04, Steve Langasek wrote:
> I still can't fathom why someone decided that udev should be responsible for
> translating PCI IDs and USB IDs into text strings. This smells of crazy.
I think that part of the rationale is that eventually HAL will go away
replaced by udev and programs like thi
On Sep 04, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> Incompetent, no. Careless, yes. Just think about the udev-related
> breakages in the past. And speaking about design, udev was originally
> praised because it can do everything in user space. Now, the authors of
> udev are proposing devtmpfs, because as it turned
On Sep 04, Ron Johnson wrote:
> Whatever the cause, it breaks the FHS.
Since it keeps being repeated, it is time to destroy this argument.
FHS documents what distributions want to do: of the other relevant
distributions, representatives from Red Hat and Suse said they do not
support this and exce
On Sep 04, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Why do you not extend the current setup to do another step? Currently we
Even if this were possible at all, it would require (for a start):
- working out all the possible side effects of synthesizing all/most
(which ones?) events a second time
- having to forwa
On Sep 04, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> The issue is most certainly raised by other distributions. See e.g. the
> thread starting with http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/62973
This is about the micromanagement of dependencies which greatly excites
Gentoo users, so is not very relevant (and
On Sep 05, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> It is my understanding that the events get triggered in/before the
> initramfs and need to be replayed after switching to / already.
> How is replaying them when entering runlevel 2 any different from
> that?
The main issue is that the rules which run in t
On Sep 05, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > They are currently providing most of the manpower for developing udev
> > and the related infrastructure so this is pretty much the practical
> > effect, yes.
> So what, you think this means we don't have any right to object when they
> design things wrong?
No
Great news. I really look forward to converting my init scripts to
native upstart jobs, but I believe that some clarifications are needed
about the long-term impact of switching to upstart.
Can you clarify what normal packages will have to do to support the
non-Linux ports which are unable to run
On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If you're unable to persuade upstream to change their implementation, and
> you're unwilling to diverge from upstream to ensure the package complies
> with Debian policy, your other option is to orphan the package and let
I am willing to diverge from upstream an
On Sep 06, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > When should maintainers start adding upstart jobs to their packages?
> Not before the upstart compat package that provides upstart-job for
> sysvinit-based systems is available.
Is this relevant for Linux-specific packages as well? I.e., do we want
to continue
On Sep 06, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> And what about embedded systems? They start to use those libraries for even
> the simplest utilities that are also usuable on very small systems. And
> that's
No, "they" do not.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 04, Serafeim Zanikolas wrote:
> As the new vict^Wmaintainer of update-inetd, I'd appreciate a review of the
> proposal below to migrate it to dpkg triggers [0]
Maybe you could have discussed it with the former maintainer, so I could
have explained why I never implemented the changes you ar
On Sep 07, "Roberto C. Sánchez" wrote:
> As part of the shorewall package reorganization, the
> /etc/init.d/shorewall init script (and the symlinks to it) has moved
> from the shorewall-common package to the shorewall package. However,
> after the upgrade of shorewall-common (which has become a
On Sep 13, Niko Tyni wrote:
> 246 packages failed to build with 'Error 13' at the end of the log,
It's a big number. Can you add a temporary workaround for a few
months until most packages are fixed?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 14, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> LB> You could file this a a wishlist bug report against the iptables
> LB> package, and see if the maintainer wish to add this file (or a larger
> LB> /etc/sysctl.d/iptables.conf with some sane defaults).
What makes you believe that the kernel defaults are
On Sep 15, Lars Bahner wrote:
> Prey tell, what is wrong with maintainers of for example iptables,
> providing a conffile
> with samples (which may even be commented out) which they can
> reference to in their documentation, where they comment on the
> different settings?
That it duplicates the s
On Sep 16, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> This bug should *NOT* be closed. Getting a deprecation warning for a simple
> and
> common use of iptables is a bug somewhere, either in iptables or the kernel.
Sometimes life is just not how we would like it to be, and by accepting
this you could save much ange
On Sep 16, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> People are still using pop/imap before smtp? OMG.
People are also still using 10 years old systems in production, so
anything that helps integrating them in modern infrastructure is
useful.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sep 25, Julien Cristau wrote:
> Doesn't this break co-installability of libfoo2.0-X and libfoo2.0-Y, if
> both install Foo-2.0.gir?
And what about multiarch?
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Recent releases of udev depend on signalfd(2), so squeeze will require
at least a 2.6.22 kernel.
The mechanism used for the etch to lenny upgrade is still in place, so
hopefully it will work again.
I suppose that the release notes will need to be updated.
The udev package in unstable does not ref
On Oct 04, Neil Roeth wrote:
> Good timing, I just ran into this. :-) What is the "mechanism used for etch
> to lenny upgrade"? How does it resolve the issue?
It does not, but it makes sure that if udev is being upgraded then an
acceptable kernel is being installed. Look at preinst.
--
ciao,
On Oct 07, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> may be a fail of the dissident test, as there is the word "must".
Which would not make it non-free either, as it is not part of the DFSG.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Oct 14, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I'm not sure what we'd do with, say, a free software program whose sole
> and exclusive purpose is to interact with the iTunes music store. Putting
> it into contrib does feel like nitpicking.
I am: the same thing which we do e.g. with ICQ clients.
It was settled
Any opinions?
This ONLY MATTERS if the user is using a self-compiled kernel, upgrades
of Debian kernel packages are automatically detected.
- Forwarded message from Greg Alexander -
From: Greg Alexander
To: Marco d'Itri
Subject: Re: Bug#551140: udev preinstall script fails if k
A: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post
Q: Were do I find info about this thing called top-posting?
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I includ
I am proposing to set net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 by default for new
installations, to simplify configuration and administration of systems
using IPv6 and to make the system behaviour match the one of all other
operating systems, which default to this or just do not provide a
choice.
When net.ipv6.bindv
On Oct 24, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> And bindv6only=0 is also not RFC compliant. However, a *lot* of applications
> that use listening sockets will not work correctly anymore when you change the
> default. So it probably is better to make it a release goal that applications
Can you make a list? I do
On Oct 25, Russ Allbery wrote:
> This is really the right solution. We did this a while back for INN and
> it's cleared up a bunch of complexity and weirdness. It would be nice if
> we could just get all the applications patched, although I suppose that's
> unrealistic.
This is why I would be s
On Oct 25, Jarek Kami?ski wrote:
> I run this configuration on most of my systems and don't have many
> problems. There was some problem with apache, but it's now fixed. Also
> java is broken and my bug report got ignored by sun, but it should be
> easy patchable (preloading socket() and calling
On Oct 25, Kees Cook wrote:
> I would like to propose enabling[1] the GCC hardening patches that Ubuntu
> uses[2].
Seconded.
hardening-wrapper does not looks like a solution to me since it execs
perl for each call to gcc and ld when installed (even when inactive).
And as you noticed, nobody uses
On Oct 28, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> 22:27 < dondelelcaro> it averaged around 180K messages per day for the past
> week; today it's already done 190K, and I think the most
> it can handle in a day is probably around 230K
It could be argued that relying on
On Oct 28, Guus Sliepen wrote:
> polipo and ircd-hybrid are the only ones that are problematic for me. I guess
> things have improved. Well, except for those daemons that are not listening on
> IPv6 at all of course...
ircds need custom configuration anyway, so this does not look like a
problem.
On Nov 08, Luk Claes wrote:
> - seed couples transition to gupnp and poppler transition (via
> gir-repository)
> - evince couples transition to poppler transition
seed due to gobject-introspection blocks udev, whose next release will
cause/require a concurrent upgrade of consolekit.
--
ciao,
Ma
Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
than 2.6.27.
If your packages have code needed to support old kernels, this is the
right time to clean it up.
This means that lenny->squeeze upgrades will use the same lockstep
kernel/udev upgrade method used for etch->lenny upg
On Nov 10, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Since it's seeming more and more common for udev to be tied to specific
> kernel versions, have you considered allowing major versions of udev
> to be installed in parallel?
Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
older configuratio
On Nov 10, Philipp Kern wrote:
> > Yes, it would not work because they also tend to be incompatible with
> > older configurations and so packages would need to provide two sets of
> > configuration files (for a start).
> Uh, so the reboot to get a newer kernel before the upgrade could possibly fa
On Nov 10, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Due to changes in udev 147, squeeze will not support kernels earlier
> than 2.6.27.
I uploaded a 147-2 package which reverts the O_CLOEXEC change and allows
2.6.26, let's see if it works.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 11, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>O_CLOEXEC (Since Linux 2.6.23)
>
> So why does using this flag require 2.6.27? Who is wrong here?
I understand that it is needed for inotify_init1(2).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Nov 16, Andres Mejia wrote:
> Well, really the only reason why I'm even bothering to package this is
> because
> I'm working on an assignment which I want to make sure builds and runs on
> CentOS and OSX and making Digest::SHA::PurePerl work would be easier for me
> than making Digest::SHA
On Nov 28, Bastian Blank wrote:
> The Linux image packages needs to do some modifications to core
> configuration files like fstab in the future to allow newer kernels to
> work. To do this and the planned further extension I intend to make all
> linux image packages depend on python.
This is not
On Oct 24, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I am proposing to set net.ipv6.bindv6only=1 by default for new
> installations
Done, let's see what breaks. :-)
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Dec 10, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> Marco, by making this change I assume you offer your personal help in dealing
> with its consequences? Please feel free to submit a fix to #560137, thanks in
> advance.
I provided the usual workaround, but the "correct" solution would be to
open two sockets.
BTW
On Dec 10, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Can you explain (or give pointers to an explanation) what the
> argumentation here is? How does not adhering to relevant standards
> simplify configuration?
There is no relevant standard that says what the default of IPV6_V6ONLY
should be. Currently what happen
How can I write an ld linker script that will cause ld to output the
same symbols two times, with and without a version tag?
I.e. I need it to output both sym...@base and sym...@libfoo_1.0.
The final goal is to fix a library which was made backward incompatible
for no good reason by adding a versi
On Dec 20, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > How can I write an ld linker script that will cause ld to output the
> > same symbols two times, with and without a version tag?
> > I.e. I need it to output both sym...@base and sym...@libfoo_1.0.
> In what sense does this make it backward-incompatible? A s
On Dec 20, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > The problem is in the other direction: new binaries reference
> > sym...@libfoo_1.0, so even if they work the old library the dynamic
> > linker outputs a warning at startup.
> Which is why Steve talked of a shlibdeps bump, which would cover this,
> since the
On Dec 23, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> 1. It obviously doesn't do this only on new installation but also on upgrades.
This is correct.
> 2. You cite RFC3493 but your request (and action) obviously violates it:
RFC3493 is informational.
> Did you ever test that "setting this option back to 0 by a p
On Dec 28, Russell Coker wrote:
> In the modern Internet where services such as EC2 are increasing in
> popularity
> in the vast majority of cases the purpose of a hostname is only for tracking
> errors.
If you are too lazy to have a script properly configure your servers it
does not mean that
On Dec 28, Jari Aalto wrote:
> It would be good if something similar were adopted to *-dbg packages as
No, it would not since as it has been explained they all work the same
way (i.e. you install one and it magically works).
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jan 13, Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this has a rather simple solution (for lenny?).
It does not, since there are multiple inet superserver daemons with
incompatible configuration file formats.
Now that I finally have been allowed to split update-inetd from netbase
ressign 408524 linux-2.6
thanks
On Jan 26, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My guess is that it's either the kernel or udev which is doing something
> wrong here. I'm filing this as a bug on udev for the time being; I'm
> sure Marco will properly reassign this bug once you've provided
On Jan 29, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What is the current prospect for the non-US archive?
It has been dead for a long time and apparently there are no plans to
resurrect it.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jan 31, Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> /dev/foo should better be linked to /dev/fooN (N==lowest possible number).
I agree in the general case (e.g. /dev/video), but not when there is an
established practice of using /dev/device in the place of /dev/device0
(e.g. /dev/dsp).
Backward c
On Feb 02, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of the enemies of security in Debian is the fact that every person
> controls their little area and has no requirement to work towards common
> goals (apart from the most obvious ones of making the system work).
Things used to be differen
On Feb 09, Jari Aalto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have reported bugs against backtick and suggested to change to use
> the more readable alternative. The result was surprising. To quote
> one message (bug closed reasoning):
>
> "If your development environment cannot display ` differently
On Feb 20, Amaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not know mrd6 well enough and I would appreciate input for the
> patch Laurent provided at #394590.
Hugo is the upstream maintainer of mrd6 and he committed it, so it
should be correct.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signatu
On Feb 26, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "You and others" cannot substitute for a response *from the package
> maintainer* acknowledging (or otherwise) the bug report. That's the
> criterion being discussed here: not a resolution for the reported bug,
> but rather a first response from t
On Mar 05, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is probably referring to binding an IPv6 :: socket and getting IPv4
> for free, so that a subsequent bind to an IPv4 0.0.0.0 address fails. So
> far as I know, this is still the Linux IPv6 behavior.
Yes, but it can be controlled with code
On Mar 26, Bastian Venthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've written a bugreport (#403706) which was discussed for a long time
> until it finally was downgraded from grave to important and became a
> "documentation issue" the for release-notes.
Hopefully for lenny we will switch to upstart, which
On Mar 26, John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think that the right thing to do is to assign the persistent names to
> network devices that still exist in the system, but to do nothing with
> any other network devices. That will allow systems to still boot and
> come up properly in the fa
On Mar 26, Julien Cristau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the problem is that you can't know in advance whether the device
> still exists or not, and whether it will be plugged in later (because
> everything runs asynchronously).
Or if it does not exist because it has been phisically removed
ss, with all "new" interfaces delayed until after all
> "old"
> interfaces were believed to be up.
Racy (and slow).
> Marco D'Itri wrote "Think harder about it and you will understand why this
> cannot
> be tested in practice," but of course that&#x
On Mar 28, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 March 2007 07:11, Luigi Gangitano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2. XEN domUs without fixed mac address setting (configurable in
> > virtual domain configuration file), can have a different MAC address
> > each time are booted
On Mar 31, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm in favor of adding a note in the Release Notes but I think we should not
> delay the release (*again*) by modifying such a critical element as udev
> right now.
I think the fix would be harmless, but it's too late anyway.
On Apr 10, Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I plan to file a couple of bugs (not too many, probably a dozen) on
> packages which contain implementations of the patented IDEA algorithm
> -- because the presence of that code makes them non-free. As far as I
> know, no program in Debian a
On Apr 09, Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm proposing that we change our de-facto policy for handling of files
> in /etc/udev/rules.d. Currently it is this (from udev's README.Debian):
It's OK, I planned to discuss this after the release.
Experience showed that generally other packages d
On Apr 26, Mike Markley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it more confusing to have the package name differ by one letter from
> the only binary in it, or is it more confusing for the package to be
> named via a different convention than similar applications? Any input is
> appreciated.
Probably it
On May 24, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is not the case, unfortunatly, and it really would be wise in the
> future to consult with people who are familiar with the arguments
> surrounding such licenses before expressing Debian's opinion to the
> FSF.
Do you mean the ftpmasters,
On May 24, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DFSG is a set of guidelines; there are many things that licenses
> can do which would be anathema to Free Software but are not
> specifically excluded by the DFSG.
But still, the first two sentences of the SC read:
"We provide the guide
On May 31, Miriam Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyway, I prefer to ask about it first: Does anyone know if CC-by 3.0 is
> DFSG-free or not for sure, shall I go ahead and put it in the repositories?
The ftpmasters do.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jun 02, Michael Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A blatant appeal to authority in place of facts or analysis isn't
> particularly useful information, and is even less so when arguments
> for the contrary position have been made but not answered.
s/arguments/opinions/
--
ciao,
Marco
signat
On Jun 05, Michael Hanke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question is now: Is it reasonable to provide this rather huge amount
> of data in a package in the archive?
Not for a niche package, at least.
> - much easier to handle for users (thinking of offline machines)
I could not care less, since
On Jun 05, Michael Hanke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe this is a valid problem. I think that is exactly the reason why
> the Debian archive also provides the sources of each package
> (orig.tar.gz) and does not simply point to the upstream sites while
> keeping only the diffs in the archi
On Jul 04, Touko Korpela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any ideas to fix this? I'm having same problem with ntp+dnsmasq
Hope that some day we will switch to upstart.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jul 04, Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In my case the network connection doesn't come up until after I've
> logged in and given the pasword for the wireless network. I don't
> think upstart is going to fix that.
It is.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital s
On Jul 05, Brian May <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marco> Hope that some day we will switch to upstart.
> Ok, so when do we switch to upstart?
Probably at the same time when we will switch from exim to postfix.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Jul 08, Tatsuya Kinoshita <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've noticed that the virtual package name `inetd-superserver' is
> defined in the list of virtual package names, but it isn't used.
> Instead, `inet-superserver' is used by openbsd-inetd, rlinetd, and
> so on.
Looks like a typo.
> Why? S
On Jun 29, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that duplicate IPs can be very harmful and even cause loss of data. For
Come on, how often this happens? And it's disabled by default anyway.
The major effect of this patch is to waste time on almost every system
every time *any* interfac
On Jul 07, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think so. Single user mode is for sysadmin tasks and I'd say that
> the udev daemon should be running for those as performing those tasks
> could result it udev triggers being generated, which should be processed.
What could I do then? /e
On Jul 09, Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would tend to disagree. 'single user mode' means 'the bare minimum for
> the system to work'; provided the system still has a static /dev if udev
> is not active (it does, right?), udev is not required at all for
> single user.
If the syste
The package has many open bugs which need to be triaged and I have not
really worked on it in more than one year, but I'd like to fix it in
time for lenny.
I am looking for one or more co-maintainers, also considering that I only
use it maybe once per month nowadays.
Knowledge of the PPP protocol
On Aug 05, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I disagree. The Release file in the archive is a configuration file that
> is part of the software interface to the archive. The terminology that it
> uses refers to capabilities within the archive maintenance software and
> within the softwar
On Aug 07, Jacob Appelbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Micah Anderson encouraged me to package this software. We were both
> annoyed that it is both very useful and seemingly abandoned software.
What does it provide exactly over the other DNS tunneling packages
available in Debian?
--
ciao,
Mar
On Aug 11, Steve Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think there should be any objection to a mass-filing for
> security sensitive bugs - and from the sounds of it you'll only be
> filing a few bugs, not a mass of them.
Except that one of the packages listed was obviously not vulnerable,
This looks like an interesting issue.
Does it have a solution?
- Forwarded message from Ole Marggraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
Subject: Bug#500786: on upgrade crash, udev installation may remain in an
inconsistent state
From: Ole Marggraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Package: udev
Version: 0.
On Oct 02, Vincent Danjean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > when the system crashes, the udev init script is still the old one,
> > referring to the non-existent udevtrigger.
> Would it be possible that lenny udev has a boiled-place udevtrigger
> that only print info on the screen ? If all works cor
701 - 800 of 1926 matches
Mail list logo
