On 12/09/11 10:12 +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
[ecryptfs as /home]
True. At the same time, it exposes quite a lot of information, e.g.
structure of the tree. I don't know how much of that could be used
in a plain-text attack.
Ack.
Note, however, that I don't really know ecryptfs. I only brie
On 12/09/11 06:50 +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
also sprach intrigeri [2011.09.11.2246 +0200]:
The d-i already supports easy *full* system encryption, swap
included.
I think this is what people should be using, not a high-level hack
like ecryptfs.
There might be different use cases. An encr
* Quoting Alexey Feldgendler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 18:07:02 +0700, Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Some of us are partial to apt-get and would appreciate
> >> apt-findremovable.
>
> > I would rather appreciate that apt-get and aptitude share the information
* Quoting Steinar H. Gunderson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 04:13:49PM +0200, Jan Kechel wrote:
> > I always had the problem, that if I removed a package via apt-get
> > remove, that there were still other packages that only were installed
> > because of that package.
>
> Use ap
* Quoting Graham Wilson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 01:52:58PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
>
> I think the more important thing to realize is that the reason we have
> -doc packages is because the documentation for a given program takes up
> a fair amount of space. If a use
* Quoting Simon Richter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> emails because of obviously nonexistent envelope addresses, that doesn't
> count those systems where we don't accept mail from *at all* because
> they are dialup systems. This, however, is a small system with 10 email
How do you define dialup syst
* Quoting Gabor Gombas ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> So, how can the administrator tell dpkg "do _not_ remove this account
> even if some package's postrm tries to purge it"? If there would be a
> method to mark some accounts out-of-reach for automatic removal, that
> would settle this issue I think.
* Quoting Ken Bloom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> The bug was related to the fact that Debian fixed this by patching the
> kernel rather than patching cdrecord, thereby making the behavior remain
> broken on Linus' vanilla kernels. IMO, this is a bug that needs to be
> fixed before releasing Sarge, so
* Quoting Joey Hess ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > an application needs to create more than one dot file then they should be
> > placed in a subdirectory with a name starting with a '.' character, (a "dot
> > directory"). In this case the configuration files should not start wit
9 matches
Mail list logo
