Network Security Toolkit

Hello everyone. Today I've read my RSS feeds and got know about new release of NST LiveCD. There's things I've never seen. I've been reading more about this project and I've liked abilities providing by this project. The thing I want very much is to imagine ping/traceroute/geolocate information

Re: Network Security Toolkit

Philip Hands p...@hands.com writes: Neil, I think Dmitrii was suggesting that there are some utilities that are used to do the geolocation stuff that are not currently packaged for Debian, which was surprising to him, given their apparent utility, so he's wondering if there's some other

What is the correct way to set owner to package's files?

Hello. I didn't know where to put this question. It's not only debian-specific, but it concerns packaging in common. Our company is distributing some software splitted into packages (deb and rpm). Almost all files are installed into /opt/ and specifically all of them must be owned by some user

Re: What is the correct way to set owner to package's files?

Konstantin Khomoutov <flatw...@users.sourceforge.net> writes: > On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 13:34:29 +0300 > Dmitrii Kashin <d.kas...@solarsecurity.ru> wrote: > >> I didn't know where to put this question. It's not only >> debian-specific, but it concerns packag

Debian package non-strict equal dependencies

There's an interesting type of dependencies in RPM: "non-strict equals". The main thing is we can describe dependency as `pkg (= "2.0")' and yum will install package `pkg' of version "2.0" with the maximum revision found. And also we can write dependency specifically with revision, f.e. `pkg (=

Re: Debian package non-strict equal dependencies

Josselin Mouette <j...@debian.org> writes: > Dmitrii Kashin <d.kas...@solarsecurity.ru> wrote: >> The main thing is we can describe dependency as `pkg (= "2.0")' and yum will >> install package `pkg' of version "2.0" with the maximum revi

Re: Debian package non-strict equal dependencies

Lars Wirzenius <l...@liw.fi> writes: > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 05:58:48PM +0300, Dmitrii Kashin wrote: >> Hm. It seems to be a solution. But I don't really understand how version >> comparison works with symbols `.', `~' and `+'. Where can I read >> comparison rules? &g

Re: Removing sysV init files

Alec Leamas writes: > Dear list, > > In the process of a complicated update, there is a question about how > to handle the systemV init scripts when doing the systemd transition. > > The package (lirc) has upstream systemd scripts which of course are > packaged. The

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

Marco d'Itri writes: > On Aug 26, Carsten Leonhardt wrote: > >> Considering the past conflicts on the topic of systemd, it should be >> expected that there is a considerable user base that is staying with >> sysvinit or another alternative. > Barely noticeable: >

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

But I know a lot of them. And not only in Debian community. And they don't agree that migrating will give them greater control over their systems. If you want I'll ask them to write here too. Attila Kinali writes: > On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 19:47:55 -0400 > Robert Edmonds

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

Philipp Kern writes: > On 2016-08-26 19:53, Wookey wrote: >> After Stretch there may not be that many sysvinit users, but I think >> that 2 releases is the minimum sensible period to maintain support for >> such a siginificant change. > > But it seems that this discussion does

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <o...@debian.org> writes: > Le lundi, 29 août 2016, 12.07:23 h CEST Dmitrii Kashin a écrit : >> But I know a lot of them. And not only in Debian community. And they >> don't agree that migrating will give them greater control

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

Don Armstrong <d...@debian.org> writes: > On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Dmitrii Kashin wrote: >> If we assume that this precedent allow a maintainer to violate policy, >> so we don't need the Policy anymore. > > Violating policy is still a bug; it may be a bug in policy

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

"Adam D. Barratt" writes: > No. Policy is not a user-focused tool, it's the documentation of how > developers / maintainers are expected to build packages. It documents > how things are and the current conventions, not how they will or might > be at some hypothetical

Re: Too many Recommends (in particular on mail-transport-agent)

Ben Caradoc-Davies writes: > Trust is not transitive. If trust is not transitive, then what for trust network exists?