sponse is swift: there was a debian developer wrongfully arrested
for running a TOR exit node. their key was revoked immediately.
How was this incident detected?
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 12:07 PM lkcl wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 7:59 PM Adam McKenna wrote:
> > You are talking about a d
eys are compromised and an attacker uploads a
compromised package?
Do we have ways of detecting these breaches or do we rely solely on user
reports?
On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:22 AM lkcl wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 6:28 PM Adam McKenna wrote:
> >
> > > i believe the answ
> i believe the answer is in the question. debian is based on distributed
trust. i did the analysis (took 3 weeks): it is literally the only distro
in the world with an inviolate chain of trust from a large keyring dating
back 20 years that is itself GPG-signed as a package, with a package
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is just
prejudice and elitism at its worst.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 03:11:42PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
Likewise, there are plenty of DD's whose S/N ratio is pretty high, and are
(pretty low, that is..)
--Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 11:46:11AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
But a number of people were taken in by this social
engineering crack and failed to ask for the real ID.
How is it a 'crack' if the information on the ID was all accurate?
--Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 04:47:17PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
Well, I agree with you that overruling the foundation documents is out of
scope for the technical committee; except the tech ctte has not been asked to
interpret or overrule the foundation documents. The Social Contract
mandates
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 02:38:53PM +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote:
One point that nobody raised so far: _reliable_ working on ndiswrapper
depends on the 16k-stack patch that is not available in Debian AFAIK.
Without that patch, drivers requiring ndiswrapper (being free or not)
only work by pure
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 12:06:51AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
However, some people like to define Debian just as main and use the
main section as the single acceptable set of free software. Which
is, of course, wrong, because requirements for contrib are defined by
DFSG, exactly as for main.
it individually, or even jointly, and make individual
recommendations to ftpmaster like any other developers. It would be
inappropriate for them to make an official statement about it.
I tried, poorly, to make this point in the other thread. Thanks for
elucidating.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL
, as opposed to some kind of
'proof of concept' OS that some people here seem to want to create, but
that the majority of our users will not want to use.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 10:33:47AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Taking it out of main moves us in the wrong direction if our goal is to
give our users a *usable* operating system, as opposed to some kind of
'proof of concept' OS that some people
to get support for
their devices.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 11:29:38AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
It seems to me that there is no reason ndiswrapper can't be available
to the installer whether it's in main or contrib.
AFAIK, it would need to be on the first CD.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
is
decreased utility for our users.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:50:16PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The question is not what problems it would cause. The problems are side
effects. It should stay in main because it is free software that is able to
be used by at least some subset
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:19:05PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Let's see, maybe you didn't read the paragraph where I said:
I did.
Is this CIPE? Or is that some other case?
No, it's not CIPE. I guess you have some more reading to do.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:48:51PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The question is not whether there is such a dependency declared; the
question is whether the software is useful without the use of non-free
software.
All right, who pushed the 'thread reset' button?
--Adam
--
To
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 02:36:54PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The tech-ctte is there to address technical disputes.
This isn't a technical dispute, it's an ideological one. The technical
details very clearly support keeping ndiswrapper in main.
--Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 05:42:51PM -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
This lists several signs that a package requires another package, but
it is not presented as an exhaustive list. If you use a broad
definition of require, it is reasonable to exclude ndiswrapper from
main on the grounds that there
the proposed use should not count.
I think it's the task of those who would ask the tech committee to overrule
the maintainer's judgement and remove ndiswrapper from Debian to prove that
ndiswrapper is not useful without non-free software, not the other way around.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL
evidence that any of those others are actually being done, however, the
ndiswrapper-in-main proponents (including myself) are arguing that that is
beside the point. Packages are not required to be useful in order to be in
Debian.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 05:03:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
The definition of contrib is that it is for a package which is a
wrapper for non-free-software.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 04:45:04PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
But I don't know; everyone seems to be dancing around the actual
question: are there any free drivers for which ndiswrapper is useful?
CIPE has been mentioned, but it has also been said that ndiswrapper
was not useful in this
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:56:46AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
I think this is clearly incorrect. The DFSG and the SC do not say
anything about the requirements for main that I can see.
And it is the *job* of the tech-ctte to resolve disputes.
I don't enjoy speaking with you, and I'm
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 01:30:25PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Help me out then. You seemed to suggest that not putting ndiswrapper
in main would be to ignore rules that are very clearly laid out in
the SC and DFSG.
I suggested that the CTTE overriding the developer's judgement in this
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:33:19PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Whether CIPE and Windows driver development count isn't a fact, it's
an opinion. Since they're both thoroughly pointless, I don't think they do.
The fact is it doesn't matter whether they 'count'. They exist, and that
is enough to
accept, than actually talk about it properly?
Because you're wrong.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:20:47AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:32:26PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
Well, yeah, I am, since I'm both on ftpmaster and on the tech ctte, the
latter of which is considering a resolution to move it right now. I'm
not sure why you'd
in main, that may be true, but it is no excuse to ignore rules
that are very clearly laid out in the SC and DFSG.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 05:55:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as the second statement being the reason that most of us want
ndiswrapper in main, that may be true, but it is no excuse to ignore rules
that are very clearly laid out
you're just confusing argument that I disagree with
with argument that is unsound or irrational.
So give a reference or Message-ID of (what you consider) a sound argument
that is not similar to CIPE, and Windows driver developers who want to test
on Linux don't count.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 05:43:59PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
Please also stop insulting ndiswrapper users and developers by calling
it a warez wrapper.
Actualy, since such ndis drivers are often provided with very
, it
should stay in main.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that
it makes even more sense for ndiswrapper to go into main (and maybe even
into base).
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:45:24PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
And for fuck's sake, stop filling up my inbox w/ this crap. I'm not
doing a thing unless either a) you people come to a consensus on the
issue (which you have not in the past threads, and probably never will),
or b) a governing
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:13:15PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
The driver should stay in main and hooks should be written into the
s/driver/package..
--Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 03:36:16PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:01:40PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
IMHO, the main purpose of contrib is to avoid shipping things on CD that
depend on programs in non-free. It is not a section that we put programs in
in order
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 03:54:23PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
No, like chosing ati over nvidia for graphic cards, or silicon image over
others for SATA cards.
Wait a minute, did I miss a memo? ATI isn't the devil anymore?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED
have been referred to as 'editorial' if wide consensus
and understanding had already been reached about their effects.
I think it's fair to say that this was not the case at the time.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
* then?
This is not supposed to happen.
Famous last words...
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 02:18:01PM +0200, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
-
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger
Téléchargez le ici !
Non merci, je ne suis pas intéressé. Par contre, Debian est assez
opposé à ce que l'on
and/or report him to the relevant
authorities if you want satisfaction.
--Adam
[1] http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#ads
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 01:00:17PM -0400, Eric Dorland wrote:
But I don't think it's good for our users for Debian to have rights
that the user don't have.
We are only concerned with the rights that apply to the software, not the
name. The users have all of the same rights to the software
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 03:38:33AM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
This just seems like change for the sake of change, with trivial benefits,
if any.
I agree, and I admit to not having read this whole thread, but has anyone
made a serious argument as to why we need yet another directory for
its removal.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 12:48:14PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote:
Andreas Barth wrote:
Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting
software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where
people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes).
Indeed. These types
from d-d?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:05:00AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Op do, 16-12-2004 te 17:07 -0800, schreef Adam McKenna:
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 01:13:11AM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote:
I think Wouter is only asking for reciprocity here. If they don't care
about his concerns why should he
or license it as they see fit. I don't see
how someone advocating freedom can in the same (virtual) breath presume to
dictate what other people do with their work.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
. Just because
someone works for an ISV or develops on/for proprietary software does not
make them a second class user.
That said, I am not arguing for or against LCC, I just didn't like the tone
of Wouter's e-mail, or the sentiment implied in it.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:31:00 -0800
Source: tmda
Binary: tmda python-tmda
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.88-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Adam D. McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Adam McKenna [EMAIL
on it? Advogato has discussion boards.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
developers who are making changes to
packages in *unstable*.
I don't see how the package being in unstable affects any part of this
argument. Will the feature backport be less desirable when the
kernel-source package is released in a stable revision of Debian?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 16:20:11 -0700
Source: tmda
Binary: python-tmda tmda
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.85-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Adam D. McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Adam McKenna [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 15:26:04 -0700
Source: tmda
Binary: tmda python-tmda
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.85-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Adam D. McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Adam McKenna [EMAIL
ahead and hijack it? I couldn't seem to find any
relevant information regarding this in the developers reference, the
policy manual or on google.
Thunderbird is too important a package for us not to be distributing. I
think a month is more than generous.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 09:20:53AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
The comparison to mailing list software makes no sense.
Maybe not in the context of viruses, but for the Joe Job problem it does.
Viruses can and should be filtered out before they reach the C-R system.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna
(or laziness in this case)
that caused this, not a fundamental problem with the software.
When the next address-spoofing virus hits, if I need to update my filters
again, I'll make a better effort to do it ASAP instead of letting it go for
several days.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 09:20:49PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
on Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:37AM -0700, Adam McKenna ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Also, I don't have any hard data to support this, but it's obvious to
me that the volume of mail generated by virus scanners in response
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 12:12:58PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 11:16, Adam McKenna wrote:
When the next address-spoofing virus hits, if I need to update my filters
again, I'll make a better effort to do it ASAP instead of letting it go for
several days.
Why not make
for SMTP's shortcomings.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 05:40:46PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Adam McKenna wrote:
TMDA does not ship with any defaults, except a couple of customizable
text files (templates). It is entirely up to the user to create a
TMDA configuration along with his own whitelist
if someone sent this intentionally in light of the
TDMA bug thread.
Either way, it presents a convincing argument.
Yes, it does present a very good example of poorly written C-R software.
Paul should switch to TMDA.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 08:20:52AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:39:43 -0700, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, it does present a very good example of poorly written C-R software.
Paul should switch to TMDA.
In which way would have TMDA avoided sending a challenge
. I do feel the remedies are necessary and advised. They
should be communicated upstream, naturally.
I suggest you take these suggestions to the TMDA worker's mailing list at
tmda.net, and file wishlist bugs against TMDA for each desired feature.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 05:10:07PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 08:21:22AM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 12:35:25PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
- TMDA should carry a warning to the user about possible consequences
of activating the C-R
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 10:27:43AM -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
Quoting Adam McKenna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I suggest you take these suggestions to the TMDA worker's mailing list at
tmda.net, and file wishlist bugs against TMDA for each desired feature.
This is an attempt to change the subject
to
have a debate about which of these arguments apply to TMDA, and why, then I
suggest he take his complaints to the upstream mailing lists @tmda.net. I
will not debate this in the BTS or on any debian list.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 07:49:27PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 12:30:07PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
Adam McKenna wrote:
The arguments are facile and specious, I do not intend to waste my
precious time responding to them.
That's a shame. I don't believe Karsten
expects to be able
to communicate with the BTS.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
should Debian
(and Debian's users) trust them?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 12:55:14AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:41:44PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 11:25:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
Trivialities such as people refusing to disclose their real names
jump to mind
On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 10:03:38AM -0700, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
that north america contains not one, but three countries: Candada, USA,
and Mexico
Candada? Is that near Canadia?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 09:22:35AM +0100, Andreas Fuchs wrote:
On 2002-12-03, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please enlighten me, anyway: Why is bouncing the full body of the
mail you received from a person who claims to be Adam back to Adam a
good idea
Darren is talking about but
I've never seen a mail server that refused to accept e-mails with a local
envelope sender from remote hosts. It should be obvious why this wouldn't
be a good idea.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
something else.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 05:13:42PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 08:56:10AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 11:49:09PM +0100, Andreas Fuchs wrote:
Thus, my conclusion: These things are evil. Don't use them or somebody
might use them against you
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:40:53AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 09:26:34AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
It's easy to be effective if you don't care about false positives.
Yes, and unless you consider people who either:
1) are too lazy to confirm
2) have
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 06:16:48PM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 09:55:34AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
BTW, anyone who e-mails you and then asks you to confirm your reply is
either using broken software, or doesn't have their outgoing mail
headers set up properly.
So
on this address?
He's talking about the envelope sender address on the confirmation messages,
which is empty (), the same as for bounce messages.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 09:58:28AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 09:55:34AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
The key issue here is that the mail isn't blocked. It's simply held in
another place until confirmed. It doesn't become a false positive until
it
is deleted without
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:52:38PM +0100, Andreas Fuchs wrote:
Today, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 11:49:09PM +0100, Andreas Fuchs wrote:
Right. I just thought up a scheme to exploit this, based on the fake
source-IP address approach you find in descriptions
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 06:22:36PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 12:30:31PM +0200, Richard Braakman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 05:47:39PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
This certainly flies in the face of the common argument that Free
Software only chases
, someone write that down. Michelle in Strabourg doesn't need non-free.
Anecdotal evidence is so much more compelling when it supports your cause,
eh?
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:56:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
Why does the GR-opposition party need to stand for anything, other than
preserving the status quo?
Thanks for clarifying that.
Your wit is razor sharp as usual
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:19:45PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 11:22:42AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 12:56:05PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:56:46AM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
Why does the GR-opposition party
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 04:34:52PM -0500, H. S. Teoh wrote:
wu-ftpd
HEH.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 07:20:39PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:42:39PM -0800, Adam McKenna wrote:
Perhaps some of us feel that The Way Things Are Now is consistent with
our
Social Contract and our list of committments, and changing that would be
violating
ObPleaseDon'tFeedTheTroll
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 02:59:32AM +0200, Russell Coker wrote:
What does a sex tractor have to do with astronomy?
Well, if you were having sex on a tractor, you'd probably be outside, looking
up at the stars.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE
988F 0096 3E4F EA4C 661F 2B46 A27C
[-- End of PGP output --]
[-- The following data is signed --]
Interesting highlighting bug in mutt -- could confuse an unsuspecting person
into thinking Branden actually signed this.
[-- End of signed data --]
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL
On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 12:34:22PM +0200, Martin F Krafft wrote:
also sprach Adam McKenna (on Sun, 16 Sep 2001 03:17:37AM -0700):
Interesting highlighting bug in mutt -- could confuse an unsuspecting person
into thinking Branden actually signed this.
oooh. this is ugly. reported
agree -- sysctl.conf should never be touched by the distribution -- it is
for local settings, specific to each machine, and there should never be a
chance that it could possibly be overwritten automatically, as that could
result in major breakage on some systems.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL
to be included in main.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
]
Err http://http.us.debian.org unstable/main libxaw6 4.0.3-1
404 Not Found [IP: 192.25.206.10 80]
Err http://http.us.debian.org unstable/main libxaw7 4.0.3-1
404 Not Found [IP: 192.25.206.10 80]
--
Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:07:27PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
have been added to Mail-Followup-To by other Mutt users, and I don't use
the
lists command at all.
in that case there would be something funny going on, here is my
theory:
you post to list, you M-F-To: is set to only the
On Wed, Jan 03, 2001 at 09:23:23PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 01:18:40AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
if this is the case the solution is fixing broken mailers, many of
them are Free software so why have patches to support M-F-To not been
made?
I'd like to see
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
