Processed: your mail
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 387555 confirmed fixed Bug #387555 [lynx-cur] lynx-cur: produces staircased tables Added tag(s) confirmed and fixed. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 387555: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=387555 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.1425631869650.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#365827: marked as done ("apt-get dist-upgrade" reinstalls lynx_2.8.5-2sarge1_amd64.deb on every call)
Your message dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015 09:34:33 +0100 with message-id <20150306083431.GA7388@emachines> and subject line "apt-get dist-upgrade" reinstalls lynx_2.8.5-2sarge1_amd64.deb on every call has caused the Debian Bug report #365827, regarding "apt-get dist-upgrade" reinstalls lynx_2.8.5-2sarge1_amd64.deb on every call to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 365827: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=365827 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: lynx Version: 2.8.5-2sarge1 Severity: minor -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.15-amd64-smp-vs Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Versions of packages lynx depends on: ii libbz2-1.0 1.0.2-7 high-quality block-sorting file co ii libc6 2.3.6-7 GNU C Library: Shared libraries ii libgnutls111.0.16-13.2 GNU TLS library - runtime library ii libncursesw5 5.4-4 Shared libraries for terminal hand ii zlib1g 1:1.2.2-4.sarge.2 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information -- additinal information $ apt-get dist-upgrade Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Calculating Upgrade... Done The following packages will be upgraded: lynx 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 0B/1882kB of archives. After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] Y Preparing to replace lynx 2.8.5-2sarge1 (using .../lynx_2.8.5-2sarge1_amd64.deb) ... Setting up lynx (2.8.5-2sarge1) ... $ apt-get dist-upgrade Reading Package Lists... Done Building Dependency Tree... Done Calculating Upgrade... Done The following packages will be upgraded: lynx 1 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. Need to get 0B/1882kB of archives. After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used. Do you want to continue? [Y/n] n Abort. --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- I close this old bug. Thanks Denis signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 387555 pending Bug #387555 [lynx-cur] lynx-cur: produces staircased tables Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 387555: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=387555 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.142563334913229.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#77909: marked as done (lynx: problem with WinRoute Pro proxy)
Your message dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:24:47 +0100 with message-id <20150306092445.GA12674@emachines> and subject line lynx: problem with WinRoute Pro proxy has caused the Debian Bug report #77909, regarding lynx: problem with WinRoute Pro proxy to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 77909: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=77909 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: lynx-ssl Version: 2.8.3.1-2 Severity: normal On a machine behind a WinRoute Pro proxy server, Lynx does not work properly. For example, I get from the proxy the following error message for the URL http://lep1.tau.ac.il/elad/ (I get this error for every URL): Error parsing http request : GET /lep1.tau.ac.il/elad / I do not have this problem with Lynx talking to other proxy servers. Also, Lynx is the only browser that have this problem - Netscape, Mozilla, Links etc works just fine with the WinRoute Pro proxy server. -- System Information Debian Release: woody Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux tsur4 2.2.18pre21 #1 Sat Nov 18 18:47:15 EST 2000 i686 Versions of packages lynx-ssl depends on: ii debconf 0.5.24 Debian configuration management sy ii libc6 2.2-3 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libssl095a0.9.5a-5 SSL shared libraries ii slang11.4.1-1The S-Lang programming library - r ii zlib1g [libz1]1:1.1.3-11 compression library - runtime --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- I close this very old unreproducible bug Thanks Denis signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#277848: marked as done (lynx's p)rint option 2)mail the file, NO LONGER works)
Your message dated Fri, 6 Mar 2015 10:31:33 +0100 with message-id <20150306093131.GA13026@emachines> and subject line #277848 lynx's p)rint option 2)mail the file, NO LONGER works has caused the Debian Bug report #277848, regarding lynx's p)rint option 2)mail the file, NO LONGER works to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 277848: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=277848 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: lynx Version: 2.8.5-2 Severity: normal Hi, it had worked until now, so this is an added bug: when online, pressing p and choosing then 2 for mailing that page, it says: 'alert': No system mailer configured. while it hadn't never changed, not as user, nor as root. ALL older lynx versions had always worked when using this very useful feature. It would be very nice if fixing this problem doesn't take many weeks, or I have to downgrade back to the previous version. Or you should maybe suggest how to fix this asap provisory. Many thanks. Osvaldo. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.4.26-1-686 Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US Versions of packages lynx depends on: ii libbz2-1.0 1.0.2-1 A high-quality block-sorting file ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-18 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgnutls11 1.0.16-9 GNU TLS library - runtime library ii libncursesw55.4-4Shared libraries for terminal hand ii zlib1g 1:1.2.1.1-7 compression library - runtime -- no debconf information --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Thank you Thomas to have tried to reproduce it. I close this old unreproducible bug. Thank you Denis signature.asc Description: Digital signature --- End Message ---
Bug#712738: lynx-cur: segfault after adding KEYMAP lines
Hello, I have the same behaviour of Atsuhito. Is the crash fixed with the right syntax? Regards Denis Briand signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 74358 pending Bug #74358 [lynx] lynx: novice info wrong [delete key usage] Added tag(s) pending. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 74358: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=74358 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.142563964029334.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: your mail
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > severity 344598 wishlist Bug #344598 [lynx] lynx: Doesn't follow page navigation links in multipage display of lists.debian.org Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 344598: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=344598 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.14256409777268.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: add patch
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + patch Bug #778009 [src:mknbi] mknbi: ftbfs with GCC-5 Added tag(s) patch. -- 778009: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=778009 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.b778009.142566029224221.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Processed: tagging 777257, found 619370 in 0.1.8
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > tags 777257 + pending Bug #777257 [src:r8168] Contains non-free firmware Added tag(s) pending. > found 619370 0.1.8 Bug #619370 [apt-p2p] apt-p2p: fails to purge - command (deluser|adduser) in postrm not found Marked as found in versions apt-p2p/0.1.8. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. -- 619370: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=619370 777257: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=777257 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.c.142566064026790.transcr...@bugs.debian.org
Bug#778009: add patch
Control: tags -1 + patch patch at http://launchpadlibrarian.net/199536198/mknbi_1.4.4-10_1.4.4-10ubuntu1.diff.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54f9d971.80...@ubuntu.com
Bug#769472: marked as done (mopd: Please switch from libelfg0 to libelf1)
Your message dated Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:31:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #769472,
regarding mopd: Please switch from libelfg0 to libelf1
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
769472: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=769472
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: mopd
Version: 2.5.3-22
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Hi,
mopd is using libelfg0 which seems unmaintained upstream (last release
seems to be around 1st Nov 2009). The description of the package states:
"This shared library may be needed by pre-packaged programs.", this
sounds to me like it's in the archive for old (closed sources?) packages
only.
See the attached patch
Cheers,
Laurent Bigonville
-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.16.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_BE.utf8, LC_CTYPE=fr_BE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
diff -u mopd-2.5.3/debian/control mopd-2.5.3/debian/control
--- mopd-2.5.3/debian/control
+++ mopd-2.5.3/debian/control
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
Section: net
Priority: extra
Maintainer: Debian QA Group
-Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.1.16), libelfg0-dev, cpio
+Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 4.1.16), libelf-dev, cpio
Standards-Version: 3.5.6.0
Package: mopd
diff -u mopd-2.5.3/patches/mopd-2.5.3-elf.patch mopd-2.5.3/patches/mopd-2.5.3-elf.patch
--- mopd-2.5.3/patches/mopd-2.5.3-elf.patch
+++ mopd-2.5.3/patches/mopd-2.5.3-elf.patch
@@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
#endif
+#ifndef NOELF
-+#include
++#include
+#endif
+
+struct mopphdr {
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm
Dear submitter,
as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.
For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667
The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.
This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)--- End Message ---
Bug#659962: marked as done (mopd: [INTL:nl] Dutch translation of debconf templates)
Your message dated Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:31:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #659962,
regarding mopd: [INTL:nl] Dutch translation of debconf templates
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
659962: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=659962
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: mopd
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch l10n
Hello,
Attached is the updated Dutch translation of the mopd debconf templates.
Please include it in your next upload.
Regards,
--
Jeroen Schot
# Dutch translation of mopd debconf templates.
# Copyright (C) 2007-2012 THE PACKAGE'S COPYRIGHT HOLDER
# This file is distributed under the same license as the mopd package.
# Bart Cornelis , 2007.
# Jeroen Schot , 2012.
#
msgid ""
msgstr ""
"Project-Id-Version: mopd 1:2.5.3-21\n"
"Report-Msgid-Bugs-To: m...@packages.debian.org\n"
"POT-Creation-Date: 2009-01-21 18:49+0100\n"
"PO-Revision-Date: 2012-02-15 12:23+0100\n"
"Last-Translator: Jeroen Schot \n"
"Language-Team: Debian l10n Dutch \n"
"Language: nl\n"
"MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
"Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
"Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
#. Type: string
#. Description
#. Type: select
#. Description
#: ../templates:2001 ../templates:4002
msgid "Interface for mopd:"
msgstr "Interface voor mopd:"
#. Type: string
#. Description
#: ../templates:2001
msgid "Please enter the interface you would like to run mopd on."
msgstr "Op welke interface dient mopd te luisteren?"
#. Type: error
#. Description
#: ../templates:3001
msgid "Nonexistent interface for mopd"
msgstr "Niet-bestaande interface voor mopd"
#. Type: error
#. Description
#: ../templates:3001
msgid "The MOP daemon configuration already exists as /etc/mopd.conf."
msgstr "De MOP-achtergronddienstconfiguratie bestaat al als /etc/mopd.conf."
#. Type: error
#. Description
#: ../templates:3001
msgid ""
"However, that configuration file specifies '${cur_iface}' as listening "
"interface, which currently does not exist."
msgstr ""
"Echter, dat configuratiebestand geeft '${cur_iface}'aan als de "
"luisterinterface, die op dit moment niet bestaat."
#. Type: error
#. Description
#: ../templates:3001
msgid ""
"You should resolve this situation by manually editing the configuration file "
"appropriately. Until this issue is resolved it is likely that mopd will not "
"function correctly."
msgstr ""
"Gelieve deze situatie op te lossen door het configuratiebestand aan te "
"passen. Mopd zal pas correct werken eens dit probleem opgelost is."
#. Type: select
#. Choices
#: ../templates:4001
msgid "other"
msgstr "anders"
#. Type: select
#. Choices
#: ../templates:4001
msgid "all"
msgstr "allemaal"
#. Type: select
#. Description
#: ../templates:4002
msgid ""
"Please choose the interface you would like to run mopd on, or select 'other' "
"if the interface is not in this list."
msgstr ""
"Op welke interface dient mopd te luisteren? Selecteer 'anders' als de "
"gewenste interface niet in de lijst voorkomt."
#. Type: select
#. Description
#: ../templates:4002
msgid "If you want mopd to listen on all interfaces, please choose 'all'."
msgstr "Als u wilt dat mopd op alle interface luistert, kies dan 'allemaal'."
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm
Dear submitter,
as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.
For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667
The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.
This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)--- End Message ---
Bug#737567: marked as done (mopd: Fails to handle Elf32 image: NetBSD 6.1.3 vax)
Your message dated Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:31:45 + with message-id and subject line Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable has caused the Debian Bug report #737567, regarding mopd: Fails to handle Elf32 image: NetBSD 6.1.3 vax to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 737567: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=737567 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: mopd Version: 1:2.5.3-21 Severity: normal Hi, I tried mopd with the NetBSD 6.1.3 (latest release) vax bootloader. Apparently Debian mopd doesn't support it. When I used installation/netboot/boot from NetBSD 6.1.3, mopd claimed to send it, but the VAX (VAXstation 4000 VLC) could not use it and looped forever, refetching the image and failing each time. When I fell back to a pre-Elf32 bootloader (from NetBSD 1.4.1), mopd sent it and the VAX booted it just fine. I asked the port-...@netbsd.org list about the problem and they concluded it is likely mopd that is at fault because our mopd predates the one in netbsd that added support for Elf32. Please see the response by Martin Husemann here: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-vax/2014/02/03/msg002006.html Unfortunately, Martin's suggestion that I try compiling NetBSD's mopd on Debian does not work. The specific errors are probably not going to be interesting, so I omit them -- it looks like NetBSD has a fundamentally different build toolchain for starters, and there are probably other issues besides; I just declared it a lost cause and decided to write this bug instead. Please add Elf32 support to the Debian mopd so I can use it to boot a modern free operating system on this hardware. Thanks, Ben -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: amd64 Kernel: Linux 3.12-1-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Versions of packages mopd depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.52 ii libc6 2.17-97 ii libelfg0 0.8.13-5 mopd recommends no packages. mopd suggests no packages. -- debconf information: mopd/other_interface: * mopd/interface: eth0 mopd/bad_interface: --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm Dear submitter, as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry that we couldn't deal with your issue properly. For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667 The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/. This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)--- End Message ---
Bug#98807: marked as done (mopd uses obsolete (PF_INET,SOCK_PACKET))
Your message dated Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:31:45 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #98807,
regarding mopd uses obsolete (PF_INET,SOCK_PACKET)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
98807: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=98807
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: mopd
Version: 2.5.4-5
Severity: wishlist
When mopd starts the following warning is displayed on the console:
mopd uses obsolete (PF_INET,SOCK_PACKET)
>From packet(7) :
COMPATIBILITY
In Linux 2.0, the only way to get a packet socket was by
calling socket(PF_INET, SOCK_PACKET, protocol). This is
still supported but strongly deprecated. The main differ
ence between the two methods is that SOCK_PACKET uses the
old struct sockaddr_pkt to specify an interface, which
doesn't provide physical layer independence.
struct sockaddr_pkt
{
unsigned short spkt_family;
unsigned char spkt_device[14];
unsigned short spkt_protocol;
};
spkt_family contains the device type, spkt_protocol is the
IEEE 802.3 protocol type as defined in
and spkt_device is the device name as a null terminated
string, e.g. eth0.
This structure is obsolete and should not be used in new
code.
Should Linux 2.0 compatibility be retained? If so maybe this should be
modified to use libpcap. If not the call could perhaps be replaced like so:
--- pf-linux2.c.origSat May 26 09:29:38 2001
+++ pf-linux2.c Sat May 26 09:30:36 2001
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@
{ u_short prot;
prot = ((typ == TRANS_8023) ? htons(ETH_P_802_2) : htons(protocol));
-if ((s = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_PACKET, prot)) < 0) {
+if ((s = socket(PF_PACKET, SOCK_RAW, prot)) < 0) {
perror(interface);
return(-1);
}
I'm the current mopd maintainer and I don't consider this bug important enough
to fix given the hazards of changing to libpcap as well as the problems
associated with losing Linux 2.0 compatibility. If you feel otherwise feel
free to let me know.
David
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux meow 2.4.4 #1 Sat May 19 09:02:27 PDT 2001 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages mopd depends on:
ii debconf 0.9.41 Debian configuration management sy
ii libc6 2.2.3-1GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm
Dear submitter,
as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.
For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667
The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/.
This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)--- End Message ---
Bug#749425: marked as done (mopd: Conflicting declarations of function pfWrite)
Your message dated Fri, 06 Mar 2015 19:31:45 + with message-id and subject line Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable has caused the Debian Bug report #749425, regarding mopd: Conflicting declarations of function pfWrite to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 749425: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=749425 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems --- Begin Message --- Package: mopd Version: 1:2.5.3-21 Usertags: goto-cc During a rebuild of all packages in a clean sid chroot (and cowbuilder+pbuilder) the build failed with the following error. Please note that we use our research compiler tool-chain (using tools from the cbmc package), which permits extended reporting on type inconsistencies at link time. [...] cc -o mopd version.o mopd.o process.o ../common/libcommon.a -lelf error: conflicting function declarations "pfWrite" old definition in module process file ../common/pf.h line 45 signed int (signed int, unsigned char *, signed int, signed int) new definition in module pf-linux2 file pf-linux2.c line 298 signed int (signed int fd, unsigned char *buf, signed int len) Makefile:8: recipe for target 'mopd' failed make[2]: *** [mopd] Error 64 make[2]: Leaving directory '/srv/jenkins-slave/workspace/sid-goto-cc-mopd/mopd-2.5.3/buildtree/mopd' It seems these problems are introduced through the patch series: http://sources.debian.net/src/mopd/1:2.5.3-21/patches/253patched-254.patch?hl=3674#L3674 As there appear to be multiple declarations and possibly also definitions of that functions, some cleanup seems warranted to ensure that this is really "only" a problem of excess arguments. Best, Michael pgpucr5HXQseX.pgp Description: PGP signature --- End Message --- --- Begin Message --- Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm Dear submitter, as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry that we couldn't deal with your issue properly. For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667 The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/. This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)--- End Message ---
Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable
We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following package(s) have been removed from unstable: mopd | 1:2.5.3-22 | source, amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, ppc64el, s390x, sparc --- Reason --- No user, orphaned, outdated -- Note that the package(s) have simply been removed from the tag database and may (or may not) still be in the pool; this is not a bug. The package(s) will be physically removed automatically when no suite references them (and in the case of source, when no binary references it). Please also remember that the changes have been done on the master archive and will not propagate to any mirrors until the next dinstall run at the earliest. Packages are usually not removed from testing by hand. Testing tracks unstable and will automatically remove packages which were removed from unstable when removing them from testing causes no dependency problems. The release team can force a removal from testing if it is really needed, please contact them if this should be the case. We try to close bugs which have been reported against this package automatically. But please check all old bugs, if they were closed correctly or should have been re-assigned to another package. Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you have further comments please address them to 750...@bugs.debian.org. The full log for this bug can be viewed at https://bugs.debian.org/750667 This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1ytxyd-0007jg...@franck.debian.org
Bug#750667: Removed package(s) from unstable
Version: 1:2.5.3-22+rm Dear submitter, as the package mopd has just been removed from the Debian archive unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry that we couldn't deal with your issue properly. For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/750667 The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal can still be found using http://snapshot.debian.org/. This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org. Debian distribution maintenance software pp. Scott Kitterman (the ftpmaster behind the curtain) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-packages-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1ytxyl-0007jo...@franck.debian.org
