On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, John Goerzen wrote:
> I just sent my first-ever message to the LDAP gateway to reset my
> password. I got the below message back. BTW, my clock is accurate.
>
> I used the exact "echo" command given in the docs.
>
> Also, I received no other reply.
There is a small bug in
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Daniel B. wrote:
> Per the The American Heritage Dictionary (via
> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dependency), a dependency
> is:
> ...
> 2. Something dependent or subordinate.
> ...
>
> That is, if A depends on B, A is a dependency of B. (B is not a
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > There are a lot of wonky things that can happen during most of the essential
> > package remove scenarios that can completely screw your system so it doesn't
> > boot or can't run programs, install scripts or something er other.
> >
> > Your
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Joey Hess wrote:
> > After verifying the signature on the data, the receiver does some sanity
> > checks. One of the checks is doing an md5sum over the entire file
> > (remember, this includes both the headers and the payload). If it
> > has seen the same md5sum in the last
On Sat, 31 Aug 2002, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 05:34:48PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> > This will break apt, as it doesn't look for compressed versions when using
> > file uris.
>
> Then apt, or debian-cd, needs to be fixed. *shrug*
Huh. debian-cd can just uncompress them, b
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Gerhard Tonn wrote:
> > apt: failed with "debian/rules:20: build/environment.mak: No such file or
> > directory" gg: failed with "/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -ljpeg"
> > hylafax: failed because textfmt wasn't built[1]
> > latte: failed with "Your STL string implementation is unu
On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> I ran dpkg-scanpackages on it myself, and haven't updated anything
> since (besides, if I had updated something, the MD5sum check would fail
> wouldn't it?)
Nope.
> Description: Dummy library package for Kerberos4 From KTH.
> This is a dummy package. It
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 11:19:13PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > apt-get knows that it has to get the file from:
> > >
> > > deb http://snoopy.apana.org.au/~ftp/debian woody main
> > >
> > > and the
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 09:50:21PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > The entires in Packages files and those in the .deb must match exactly
> > (ie byte for byte), otherwise it sees them as different packages. Since
> > dpkg manipulate
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Brian May wrote:
> Can't apt realize that if it is going to install a package from source
> X, it should use the Packages entry from source X too?
The entires in Packages files and those in the .deb must match exactly
(ie byte for byte), otherwise it sees them as different p
On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> I beg your pardon? Which naiveness? That particular bit of libtool
> solves a very real problem: dlopen is *not* portable.
Careful here, dlopen is defined by SUSv2, all the libtool hackage is does
is allow OS's to get away with not conforming
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > Not only that, it's only useful for linking, so has no reason being in
> > > the primary runtime.
> >
> > ltdl needs them at runtime.
>
> Then ltdl is broken. How does one install libfoo.so.1 and libfoo.so.2
> and only have libfoo.la, and ltdl expec
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Martin Pool wrote:
> I'd appreciate comments.
Hmm...
As you may know I'm both the APT author, administrator of the top level
debian mirrors and associated mirror network. So,
> 3.2 rsync is too hard on servers
> If it is, then I think we should fix the problems, rather tha
On Tue, 9 Apr 2002, Michael Bramer wrote:
> -> make the check on the client site and
> -> download the file partly per ftp/http
> -> make the new file with the old and downloaded parts
>
> With this the server need only extra rsync-checksum files.
Rumor around rsync circles is that this
On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Michael Piefel wrote:
> clear to someone who takes the easy path like me. It would also help if
> I could see your current source; the CVS archive on cvs.debian.org does
> not seem to be current.
It is current.
Jason
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a su
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Michael Piefel wrote:
> You, Jason, did not add full i18n support to APT, and were not willing
> to accept my patches for woody. This is OK, as APT is a very central
> package and has been in different shades of freeze for quite some time.
Bzzt, I accepted the parts of your p
On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Erich Schubert wrote:
> I REALLY REALLY would like to see translated apt in woody.
> And i cannot understand why apt-i18n is not installed so we could
> test it. Adding apt-i18n to unstable will not break anything, but
> interested developers can test this before adding it to
On Mon, 7 May 2001, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> What is apt-get upgrade complaining about here? On a cursory glance,
> there isn't anything wrong with any of these proposed installations:
It's an error with how the message is printed, it is showing the wrong
number for 'is to be installed' IIRC.
J
On 1 May 2001, Brian May wrote:
> Jason> No, it means you can't do this specific situation you asked
> Jason> for, you said dist-upgrade works, so you can in fact
> Jason> upgrade to unstable!
>
> I don't recall saying that. If so, I did, I am sorry, I must have been
> confused at t
On 1 May 2001, Brian May wrote:
> >>>>> "Jason" == Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Jason> On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Brian May wrote:
>
> >> WARNING: The following essential packages will be removed This
> >&g
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > Speaking of IA-64: Do we have a machine yet? AFAIK not. Do you think HP
> > would be willing to make one availible to Debian?
>
> Please verify the situation regarding ia64 and get back to me.
HP, via Matt Taggart, is planning to put a IA64 box and a
On 8 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Then that feature should be limited to non-recursive listings or
> turned off. Or .listing files should be created that are just served.
*couf* rproxy *couf*
> So when you have more blocks, the hash will fill up. So you have more
> hits on the first leve
On 8 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > Apparently reversing the direction of rsync infringes on a
> > patent.
> When I rsync a file, rsync starts ssh to connect to the remote host
> and starts rsync there in the reverse mode.
Not really, you have to use quite a different set of o
On 7 Jan 2001, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> > gzip --rsyncable, aloready implemented, ask Rusty Russell.
>
> I have a copy of Rusty's patch, but have not applied it since I don't like
> diverging Debian packages from upstream this way. Wichert, have you or Rusty
> or anyone taken this up with the gzip
On 8 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> > The short answer is exactly what you should expect - No,
> > absolutely not. Any emergence of a general rsync for APT
>
> Then why did it take so long? :)
I was traveling.
> > method will result in the immediate termination of public
On 8 Jan 2001, Brian May wrote:
> Do you know when they plan to integrate rproxy support into programs
> like squid, apache and Mozilla (as per their web site)?
No, I do not follow that closely. What we need to see is an apache module
primarily. There are also some (IMHO) serious issues with abo
On 7 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> Actually the load should drop, providing the following feature add
> ons:
>
> 1. cached checksums and pulling instead of pushing
> 2. client side unpackging of compressed streams
Apparently reversing the direction of rsync infringes on a patent.
Plus th
On 7 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> I tried to contact the apt maintainers about rsync support for
> apt-get (a proof of concept was included) but haven't got an answere
> back yet.
No, you are just rediculously impatatient.
Date: 06 Jan 2001 19:26:59 +0100
Subject: rsync support for apt
On 5 Jan 2001, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> If that suits your needs, feel free to write a bugreport on apt about
> this.
Yes, I enjoy closing such bug reports with a terse response.
Hint: Read the bug page for APT to discover why!
Jason
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Heikki Kantola wrote:
> For few days (first experienced this on 1.1.) I've been trying to figure
> out what's wrong with APT as whatever command I try, I get:
Er, ah, er, the only time I've seen that is when someone had too many
items in their sources.list, but I did not thin
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> When I wrote, that the proxy variables were ignored just my description
> was wrong. May be they are used but they are used in an other way
> than if I use settings in /etc/apt/apt.conf. While trying several different
> proxy-settings (sorry, don't re
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> >From /var/lib/dpkg/available:
> Package: makedev:
> ...
> MD5sum: 7f6b97b984c246ead2c7be45ce4f1678
>
> /var/cache/apt/archives/partial> md5sum makedev_2.3.1-46_all.deb
> 7f6b97b984c246ead2c7be45ce4f1678 makedev_2.3.1-46_all.deb
Please use apt-cache
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I'm in real trouble with apt-get and a squid proxy. First of all
> I found out that in contrast to the manual of apt.conf the environment
> variables
Uh..
Wakko{root}~/work/apt2/build/bin#http_proxy="http://void"; apt-get install apt
Reading Package
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> Oliver Schulze is an upstream maintainer of one of my prospective packages,
> and he's had problems sending mail to my @debian.org address. I believe that
> this is something to do with master's IPv6 configuration - the SMTP error
> message from master i
On 6 Sep 2000, Andrew J Cosgriff wrote:
> On a similar (but kinda opposite) note, are there any plans to add
> some bandwidth-limiting functionality to apt/apt-get ?
No. It isn't very effective to try and do that from an application - use
the services in the linux kernel if you really need it...
On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Russell Coker wrote:
> I would like to transfer several files at a time to enable usable throughput
> through slow web caches. Is there any way this can be done? If not can this
> feature be added?
If I recall it isn't too hard, but it isn't there specificly to prevent
yaho
On 1 Sep 2000, Alex Romosan wrote:
> with 'apt-get source -b '. what's the point in having the
> ability to download the source and recompile it automatically if the
> next upgrade will wipe it out. if i choose to recompile a package, apt
Mostly to compile versions that are not available for 'st
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Peter Teichman wrote:
> I have one question. What is the preferred way for me to handle our
> gtk package? This is a library package that we actually apply some
> patches to for a slightly nicer user interface.
Well, we don't have much provision for flavors of shared librari
On 30 Aug 2000, Alex Romosan wrote:
> > It means the libc6 package you have installed has a different md5sum then
> > the package it finds on ftp.corel.com, and assumes that the version on
No, this is not at all how it works..
> which are not on by default and then i have to put the packages on
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Michael Meskes wrote:
> | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
> |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err:
> uppercase=bad)
> ||/ NameVersionDescription
> +++-===-==-===
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> > Could anyone please explain this to me? Did Corel do anything to their files
> > that makes apt think it has to upgrade although its up-to-date? Or is this
> > a bug in apt?
>
> I see this quite often, so it is a bug in the curret apt lib. aptitude
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
> > Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
>
> Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other remarks on this subject.
>
> An Origin field is a great idea.
We ha
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Presumably sections and tasks will both be subsumed by this. I think
> these should probably be handled differently: saying "I want the games
> task" should probably default to installing all; whereas you'd probably
> not want to say "I want the games s
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> snmpnetstat will show the routing table of routers that export it
> through SNMP. My point is that route in this case is simply a
> special case of snpmnetstat.
Most routers have a security arrangement so that the information is not
public.
Jason
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Alexander Reelsen wrote:
> Where the heck the word 'stable' comes from? I removed my hole
> /var/state/apt/ and I do not know where it comes from. Hardcoded anywhere
> perhaps? Or did I miss something grave?
The slink package files have this inside.. That needs to be changed
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's been pointed out that emdebian (http://www.emdebian.org/) is
> essentilly an effort to do just this.
It is? I use their stuff and the main focus is cross compilers and cross
environments for debian, not really shrinking and porting debian proper.
Th
On 15 Aug 2000, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Is it really your contention that all MTA's should provide for
> this configurability, and cooperate with all other MTA packages out
> of the box? I am afraid that all this handshaking is going to entail
> a lot of effort, and the resultant gains
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> What I'd like to happen is basically be able to remove the package,
> and just have the task automatically act as though that package had
> never existed. Not complain in dselect about it, not worry people when
> Apt gives you a warning, not do anything
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> while i can't imagine ever justifying having postfix AND exim installed on
> the same machine, your argument holds true for other things. for instance,
> it's not uncommon to see a machine that has apache running on 80 for
I've done it - had to really..
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Drake Diedrich wrote:
> >Under the Irix packaging system (quite nice UI except that it has to
> > handle Irix packages..) packages exist in a hierarchy, with lowest level
> > packages quite fine grained.
>
> Wow, I quite like this. How could we do it?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Tasks are bettered handled through some kind of non-package means. I've
> > long said we need to determine some kind of meta-package scheme (a
> > 'package' whose only purpose is to logicall
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> > * Tasks are great, but task-* packages suck when some of the
> > packages included have release critical bugs. (Remove the
> > package, the entire task breaks)
>
> You know, if apt could only support Reccommends, task packages could be
>
On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> This is a seperate problem. I agree that this should not be the case, but it
> has no place in this discussion. If individual developer keys are
> compromised, we have a problem no matter what. Developers should not store
> secret keys on net connecte
On 2 Apr 2000, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> > Solution: remove the identity from .ssh/authorized_keys on my home
> > machine.
> Note that *any* keys that your agent holds can be snarfed by the
> admin(s) of any hosts where you ssh-in with agent forwarding enabled.
No, that is the point of ssh-age
On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 03:16:23PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > How many people
> > foward ssh agents and put that key in their home .ssh/authorized_keys?
>
> What does that mean? It could easily be that I am doing something
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> We already use link 1 (signed changes files), and trust it. This won't
> be changed by either proposal. Yes, even in the signed packages file you
> trust all developers keys.
We only trust link1 due to the vigilance of our FTP masters and people
read
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> Wrong. If you have signed debs, and you are careful when updating the
> debian-keyring package, there is no risk even if master is compromised.
Hahha!
Sorry, your are deluded if you belive this :> Seriously, if someone can
hack master we are all vun
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> In the signed .debs case, I, as a developer, assert that the package comes
> from me. A user can directly verify this by checking the signature.
No, the user cannot verify that. The user can check the signature against
our keyring but they have no id
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Why would verifying a new security-key necessarily be significantly harder
> than verifying a new unstable-key, though? In both cases you only really
> want to check that its signed by the previous security-key.
But in the other case it replaces/augemen
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> * the web of trust, and having the ftp-team sign it
The average user has no entry to the web of trust, so this is just as
useless. (and massively involved for our poor end user)
> * putting a fingerprint on the website and in Debian books,
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> I'm not sure why this isn't getting through. Automatically, cavalierly
> signing Packages.gz on master *HAS DEFINITE GAINS OVER THE PRESENT WAY
> OF DOING THINGS*.
How exactly do you propose to transfer a verification key to the clients?
I can't think o
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> 216 people, if I counted right (wc(1) :). So much for the `300 active
> developers' vaporware, even if you include dissidents et al...
It think it just clearly shows typical lack of election interest. FYI,
Echelon has confirmed a total of 346 developers
On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> you were lucky enough to be able to set up something at work. many
> others will be able to setup something similar. debian developers
> should have the option of a uucp account from one of the debian servers
> (trivially easy for us to set up).
I thi
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Larry Gilbert wrote:
> Why is murphy.debian.org not adding a "Received:" header to show where
> messages are originating? This information is useful when trying to
> track down actual spammers. Is this being deliberately omitted or does
> qmail just normally not include thi
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> No, not yet. But as it must integrate in what we already have ... WML has
> support for eperl. But I have decided of absolutely nothing and it's
> possible that I end without eperl and without php with a simple perl
> script (I don't know python but m
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Alexander Koch wrote:
> DUL is interesting. I changed my mind on that. I rather say
> we use it since the amount of spam is certainly increasing
> the last weeks and DUL is understandable.
Yes there is more spam, but I've been looking and I haven't seen that much
(if any at
Okay, since everyone really desperately wants to know, I ran the numbers
on the effectiveness of RBL, RSS, DUL and ORBS against the mail intake for
lists.debian.org. All of this is theoretical and done offline against the
log file, we are blocking only via RBL (and now RSS)
The period of analysi
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> output after failing to install 42 packages). I repeat: All packages
> were installable with dpkg -i after apt-get was unable to install
That doesn't mean anything, if the file was only 1 byte short chances are
it would still be entirely valid, dpkg -
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Adam Heath wrote:
> You'll note the addition of 3 fields(Format, Patches, and Tarballs), and the
> different files specified for the files field. The existance of a Format
Having a .tarballs.tar.gz seems rather pointless, just have all the tars
seperate - as does including
On 18 Mar 2000, Brian May wrote:
> I believe the original poster used dpkg -i to install the same copy
> that apt had downloaded - ie only one copy ever downloaded.
Then dpkg should have failed to install it since it is a truncated file.
> Not sure about libtool, but have a look at bugs 60339
On 18 Mar 2000, Brian May wrote:
> >> libtool 1.3.3-9 [177kB] Failed to fetch
> >>
> http://ftp.tu-clausthal.de/pub/linux/debian/dists/frozen/main/binary-i386/devel/libtool_1.3.3-9.deb
> >> Size mismatch E: Unable to fetch some archives, maybe try with
> >> --fix-missing?
>
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Brian Mays wrote:
> > But the comment says the whole story, it is compatible with standard
> > Adobe fonts, aka times which is what I had the problem with.
> Jason - You would think so. Nevertheless, try it; it works. Therefore, I
> must assume that the comment is incorr
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 michael@fam-meskes.de wrote:
> It seems master does not accept ssh connections. What's going on?
No, just from you..
Mar 17 00:57:44 master named[1815]: bad referral (de.colt.net !<
host.DE.COLT.net)
Mar 17 00:57:44 master sshd[4266]: warning: /etc/hosts.deny, line 15:
can't
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000, Brian Mays wrote:
> The ligatures are supported, but dvips switches the characters in the
> font around. This can be fixed by turning off the "G" option in the
> /etc/texmf/dvips/config.pdf file.
But the comment says the whole story, it is compatible with standard
Adobe fon
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Reading Package Lists... Done
> Building Dependency Tree... Done
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> libtool
> 0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 13 not upgraded.
> Need to get 177kB of archives. After unpacking 681k
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Steve Greenland wrote:
> Why not? Have you read the compiler/linker docs? Adding -I/some/dir/inc
> and -L/some/dir/lib causes those directories to be searched *before* the
> default directories. I don't have an opinion about where the X stuff
> should go, but the above argume
On Sun, 12 Mar 2000, Joey Hess wrote:
> I hope you weren't even considering one package per module? I understand
> (from IRC) that the 100 modules weigh in at 12 mb. The typical xserver-*
Why not? Nobody else seems to have a problem with creating bazillions of
itty bitty packages for some incomp
On 11 Mar 2000, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> I've been running 2.3 kernels for a while now, and so have
> several people. Though it may not work as a default ekrnel,
But can we integrate the necessary new changes to properly support 2.4?
devfsd, the new firewall code, new PCMCIA, etc?
Jas
On Sat, 11 Mar 2000, [iso-8859-1] Nicolás Lichtmaier wrote:
> > > Trouble ahead?
> > Please run "apt-get install apt" before doing the dist-upgrade. Old apt
> > don't manage well the perl transition. This will be documented in the
> > Release Notes.
>
> Why don't we make the new perls conflict
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Jacob Kuntz wrote:
> wouldn't it make more sense to use something like mirror or wget untill
> debdiff matures? are mirror admins required to use rsync?
Sadly rsync is far, far better that mirror or wget, both of which are
verging on useless for an archive of our size.
We
On 9 Mar 2000, Douglas Bates wrote:
> The system has been up for 14 days and /etc/motd was last modified on
> Jan 27. Is it possible that the repairs are complete and someone
> forgot to remove this line from /etc/motd?
No
Jason
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, David Starner wrote:
> I'm not arguing the rest of your points, but I'm curious about
> this one. IIRC, the last thing a full bootstrap of GCC does,
> after building stage one binaries with the native compiler,
Hum, It *used* to do this, can't seem to get it to do it today t
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Andrea Mennucc1 wrote:
> rsync contains a wonderful algorithm to speedup downloads when mirroring
> files which have only minor differences;
> only problem is, this algorithm is ALMOST NEVER used
> when mirroring a debian repository
Small detail here, .debs, like .gz files a
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Rene Mayrhofer wrote:
> Is it possible to use a key created by pgp5 for package signing ? The
> key works for me when I use it with gpg, both the opposite is not true
> (e.g. pgp5 is unable to verify a signature created with a gpg key). I am
> no maintainer yet and so I want t
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Yves Arrouye wrote:
> > As for the discussion, APT actually has such a feature cleverly
> > undocumented and unmentioned - if you flag a package as Impotant: then
> > its downtime is minizimized by the ordering code.
> packages that conflict with them. An example is moving fr
Hi,
I have done some improvements to the Debian buisness card tex files that
are floating around. My changes are at http://www.debian.org/~jgg.
The rundown is that I sized and made available the bottle version of the
logo, adjusted the PGP key font/spacing, reordered some text and put much
bette
On Mon, 4 Oct 1999, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:06:10PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:15:54AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > I think the worst case would be a telnetd linked with a broken
> > > shlib (or in the case of telnetd, perhaps a missing
On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Fabien Ninoles wrote:
> Many time, apt-get break on conflicting files. It happens me often
> on unstable but also when upgrading from slink to potato. Here some
> recommendations to help users resolved the conflicts and also to
> help maintainers do the Right Things (TM) the f
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Thomas Schoepf wrote:
> I don't understand how this should reduce/limit the number of files in a
> single directory.
Well, it's an application of probability theory.. The last couple digits
are more evenly distributed over the range of active (and inactive) bugs
so you get a
On 1 Oct 1999, James Troup wrote:
> [ RSA is no longer included. ]
Wait wait, doesn't this mean that ssh RSA authentication is gone as well??
Did they replace it with DSS/DH or what? IMHO ssh would cease to be very
usefull as a security tool without a public key mechism, not to mention
that exis
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Darren Benham wrote:
> No, seriously, that's how it's created but as long as we don't start ignoring
> bugs, we'll never see or 9 bugs in a single directory.
Yeah, but the entire reason behind splitting things up like that was to
reduce the number of files per-direc
On 30 Sep 1999, James Troup wrote:
> OpenBSD have started working on the last free SSH (1.2.12 was under a
> DFSG free license AFAICT[1]), they also, (again AFAICT [I'm going by
> the CVS commits]), are ripping out the patented algrothims (IDEA,
> etc.). Unfortunately, I'm chronically busy with
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Federico Di Gregorio wrote:
> apparently I can't access db.debian.org: I use my password
> on master and the server gives me "authentication failed". (Note that
> I can login in master with that same password.) Is something broken?
> (my brain for example?)
You probabl
I have put up a new way to enter your location information, it is a PGP
signed mail gateway at [EMAIL PROTECTED] It can actually change quite
a few things, but for the moment I am only announcing the ability to set
location and contact information :>
The server is line oriented much like [EMAIL P
On 26 Sep 1999, Mark W. Eichin wrote:
> In addition to apologies to Mr. Norman, perhaps there's some value in
> either (1) making tcplogd etc. require enough configuration to force
> people to read the documentation, or (2) enhance those packages to
> interpret things a little more, so they scare
On Sun, 26 Sep 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > I would like a couple people to look over this patch I have made to SSH.
> > It creates a new option that allows ssh to lookup RSA authentication keys
> > in a global file modeled after the
Hi all,
I would like a couple people to look over this patch I have made to SSH.
It creates a new option that allows ssh to lookup RSA authentication keys
in a global file modeled after the shadow password file. The intent is to
allow users to place their RSA ssh key into the ldap directory and t
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, James A. Treacy wrote:
> I may add a comment to the coords file describing how the image is created
> so people can create their own. Hopefully someone has a printer that can
> print a large version.
Can you send them to me? I will include them in the man page for ud-xearth
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999, James A. Treacy wrote:
> I should have used https://www.debian.org/ in the original mail.
> Sorry. Everyone who can (legally) use ssl should use that URL.
Yes, this is definately the best way to enter the data right now.
Encrypted LDAP is comming in many months though.
> A
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> Great work guys. Just a query though -- is the web server on
> www.debian.org working properly? It takes me several minutes to retrieve
> the home page lately! No other sites exhibit this problem.
AFAIK, but one other person did mention this - can you
1 - 100 of 277 matches
Mail list logo
