Bug#137756: www.debian.org: Debian Security Advisories not up to date
Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > ... we could use a more automated way to publish the web page > excerpts. I've talked to the security officers several times about > this and we have advanced the advisories' format so that they are > mostly parseable. I've written a script to convert the advisory file > into almost-finished WML, and the files generated by it usually need > just a little bit of human intervention. > > I would have gone further in automating it, however, I don't have the > permissions to edit the programs the security team they use to publish > an advisory. In that program it probably wouldn't be much of a problem > to split the advisory information into chunks suited for inclusion in > the web page, and then copy those chunks to the right place, run the > right stuff and make the new stuff go live. It sounds like someone should file a bug against debian-security (and if the bug system supports dependencies, make this one depend on it). Joint action seems to be required. Finally, I do not believe that this bug should be closed until the problem is addressed in a permanent way. Can you please reopen it? - Dan
Re: Debian WWW CVS commit by alfie: webwml/german/international/German index.wml
* Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-08 18:07]: > On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 08:35:50AM -0800, Debian WWW CVS wrote: >> Modified files: >> german/international/German: index.wml >> >> Log message: >> Aargh, forgot to bump the translation-check... > > That should be the other way around -- the German file should be marked as > the original. I would also have thought so but didn't do the original files - so I'm not sure if I should simply change them. Joey? Any objections if I change that when I change something in there the next time? So long, Alfie -- Jaja, Yggdrasil. LGX 1.0. Kernel 0.99.irgendwas. Herbst 1993. Damals hatte man noch alle Haare, alle Zähne und täglich Sex. Schön war das. Und heute? Heute hat man Windows 2000. Tja. -- Christian Anzenberger
Bug#137756: www.debian.org: Debian Security Advisories not up to date
On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 11:03:42PM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > It sounds like someone should file a bug against debian-security (and if > the bug system supports dependencies, make this one depend on it). > Joint action seems to be required. > > Finally, I do not believe that this bug should be closed until the > problem is addressed in a permanent way. Can you please reopen it? The security team doesn't have a pseudo-package in the BTS. -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Re: Debian WWW CVS commit by alfie: webwml/german/international/German index.wml
On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 09:14:13AM +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > >> Modified files: > >>german/international/German: index.wml > >> > >> Log message: > >>Aargh, forgot to bump the translation-check... > > > > That should be the other way around -- the German file should be marked as > > the original. > > I would also have thought so but didn't do the original files - so I'm > not sure if I should simply change them. > > Joey? Any objections if I change that when I change something in there > the next time? Just change them and be done with it :) The old stuff in intl/ is seldomly correctly marked, since it was created before translation-check. -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Bug#137839: www.debian.org: i386 port could mention some supported processors
Package: www.debian.org Severity: wishlist On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 03:31:20PM +0900, Bozin LCpl George S wrote: > Ive taken a look at your ports page and have failed to see support for AMD > processeors. > I would just like to know what port I would need which is listed for my AMD > XP 1700+ processor, if any. Thank you. Perhaps it would be worth mentioning (in /ports/index.html) a few processors supported by the i386 port. You could adapt the text from the kernel's Configure.help: Intel or compatible 80x86 processor CONFIG_X86 This is Linux's home port. Linux was originally native to the Intel 386, and runs on all the later x86 processors including the Intel 486, 586, Pentiums, and various instruction-set-compatible chips by AMD, Cyrix, and others. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Previous retitle command didn't go to control@bugs
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 136725 "woody Release Information" should mention "man > apt_preferences" Bug#136725: debian-devel-announce should mention "man apt_preferences" Changed Bug title. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
ÄúºÃ
ä½ æ³æ¥ææ´å¤çéé±åï¼æ°çå©è®©ä½ 梦æ³æçï¼ æ³¨ååå æ°çå©åå¡ä¿¡æ¯ç½ï¼ä½ å°±å¯ä»¥å大财ï¼åå å¦ä¸ï¼ 1 注ååå æ°çå©åå¡ä¿¡æ¯ç½ï¼å³å¯å¾å°åç§åå¡ä¿¡æ¯åè¥å¹²å¸åºè½¬è®©ä»·å¨ä¸ å 以ä¸çå®ç¨ææ¯ï¼å®ä»¬æ¯å©ä½ è´å¯ç好帮æã 2 éè¿å®£ä¼ ï¼åå±ä¸çº¿å¯å¸¦æ¥ä¸°åçåæ¥ï¼æä½å¾å½ï¼ä¸å¹´å¯èµå åä¸ã 详æ 请访é®ï¼ æ°çå©ç½ç« http://www.xinyingli.net/?mid=avon 请认çé 读该ç½ç«ï¼ä¸è¦æ ç注åãå°ç¡®å®è®©ä½ ä¿¡æçæ¶åï¼ç¹å»ç½é¡µä¸é´ç âè¿å ¥æ³¨å..â æè å 注åæ临æ¶ä¼åè¯è¯ï¼å¦æè§å¾å¯ä»¥å¨æ³¨åæ为æ£å¼ä¼åã æ°çå©ç½ç«æ³¨å临æ¶ä¼åï¼http://www.xinyingli.net/zhuce.php?mid=avon å¦æè¿ä»½é®ä»¶ææ°äºæ¨çæ¸ éï¼æåä¸é¡¿é¦ï¼æ¬è¯·å é¤ http://go6.163.com/ghztavon é è³ç³»ååå¦åãç½é¡µç¹æãæç´¢å¼æå¤§å ¨ãå¨çº¿æ¸¸æãå¾çãæ±æ¹èçç综åç½ç«ã = æ¬é®ä»¶éç¨ææé®ä»¶ç¾¤åæå¡å¨è½¯ä»¶åéââæ éSMTPä¸ç»§é«é群åï¼å¿«æäº! 主页:http://seekease.onchina.net éå:http://seekeasy.onchina.net 注æ:æ¬è½¯ä»¶ä» éäºåæ³ç¨éï¼å¦æåéåå¾é®ä»¶é æåææ¦ç±ä½¿ç¨è èªè¡æ¿æ !
Bug#137839: www.debian.org: i386 port could mention some supported processors
On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 05:58:16AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote: > Package: www.debian.org > Severity: wishlist > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 03:31:20PM +0900, Bozin LCpl George S wrote: > > Ive taken a look at your ports page and have failed to see support for AMD > > processeors. > > I would just like to know what port I would need which is listed for my AMD > > XP 1700+ processor, if any. Thank you. > > Perhaps it would be worth mentioning (in /ports/index.html) a few > processors supported by the i386 port. You could adapt the text from the > kernel's Configure.help: > > Intel or compatible 80x86 processor > CONFIG_X86 > This is Linux's home port. Linux was originally native to the Intel > 386, and runs on all the later x86 processors including the Intel > 486, 586, Pentiums, and various instruction-set-compatible chips by > AMD, Cyrix, and others. I vaguely recall problems getting the potato kernel to boot on newer Athlons and P4s. Any idea if that's been fixed? -- 2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Bug#137839: www.debian.org: i386 port could mention some supported processors
On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 03:34:13PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 05:58:16AM -0600, Colin Watson wrote: > > Perhaps it would be worth mentioning (in /ports/index.html) a few > > processors supported by the i386 port. You could adapt the text from the > > kernel's Configure.help: > > > > Intel or compatible 80x86 processor > > CONFIG_X86 > > This is Linux's home port. Linux was originally native to the Intel > > 386, and runs on all the later x86 processors including the Intel > > 486, 586, Pentiums, and various instruction-set-compatible chips by > > AMD, Cyrix, and others. > > I vaguely recall problems getting the potato kernel to boot on newer Athlons > and P4s. Any idea if that's been fixed? Haven't a clue, sorry ... -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#137860: www.debian.org: Search frontend in packages.debian.org could be improved
Package: www.debian.org Version: 20020311 Severity: wishlist I usually find myself using packages.debian.org/_name_of_package to search for packages, however, many times I mistype the name or the package or I used a word of the package but not the full (exact) name. In all this cases I receive: Debian package search results No responses to your query. It would be much more useful if a footer was added to this default page that includes: - a new link so you can easily search with the same query but using subwords (appending '&subword=1' to the query) - a direct link to the package search page (packages.debian.org) so users do not have to rewrite the URL in their browser (removing all the options...) So that the page would be more like: Debian package search results No responses to your query. You might improve your query and find the packages you are trying to by: Searching packages which contain the word you typed Improve your search. This interface defaults to searchin exact package name matches in all releases and versions. -- System Information Debian Release: 3.0 Kernel Version: Linux avalon 2.4.18 #1 SMP mar mar 5 17:18:31 CET 2002 i686 unknown
Bug#137839: www.debian.org: i386 port could mention some supported processors
On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 02:03:19PM -0500, Otis Ward wrote: > Mr. Watson, > > I've received your message, I'm sure in error. Could you please recheck your > destination address and try again in case your message never arrived there. > Thanks and take care. I've contacted Otis Ward privately about this, no need for anybody else to do so ... -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#137839: www.debian.org: i386 port could mention some supported processors
Mr. Watson, I've received your message, I'm sure in error. Could you please recheck your destination address and try again in case your message never arrived there. Thanks and take care. -- Otis Ward President Machine Interface Consulting, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - email (212) 699-3825 x5486 - voicemail/fax 718.466.7026 Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: www.debian.org > Severity: wishlist > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 03:31:20PM +0900, Bozin LCpl George S wrote: > > Ive taken a look at your ports page and have failed to see support for AMD > > processeors. > > I would just like to know what port I would need which is listed for my AMD > > XP 1700+ processor, if any. Thank you. > > Perhaps it would be worth mentioning (in /ports/index.html) a few > processors supported by the i386 port. You could adapt the text from the > kernel's Configure.help: > > Intel or compatible 80x86 processor > CONFIG_X86 > This is Linux's home port. Linux was originally native to the Intel > 386, and runs on all the later x86 processors including the Intel > 486, 586, Pentiums, and various instruction-set-compatible chips by > AMD, Cyrix, and others. > > -- > Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ FREE voicemail, email, and fax...all in one place. Sign Up Now! http://www.onebox.com
debian-legal list entry - confidential information disclosure
To whom it may concern,
It came to our attention that Debian have
published on one of their mailing lists ("debian-legal") our company's
confidential e-mail exchange.
This has been done without seeking our
consentand we urge Debian to remove the entry and the follow-ups from its
archive servers immediately.
Details of the thread published through Debian web
pages:Subject: copyright problem (regarding eemu and
compatibles(LONG))The web address of the information:http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/debian-legal-200012/msg00101.html and
the follow-up letters ...
Thank you for your cooperation.
Regards,
Anna VoleynikSales & Marketing
Manager--eEMUconcept
Pty. Ltd.web: http://www.eemuconcept.come-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]The eEMU
Monitoring Software
Company--This
email may be confidential and/or privileged. Only the intendedrecipient may
access or use it. If you are not the intended recipient,delete this email
and notify us promptly. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution
of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. We use virus
scanning software but exclude all liability for viruses or similar in any
attachment.
Re: debian-legal list entry - confidential information disclosure
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Anna wrote:
> It came to our attention that Debian have published on one of their
> mailing lists ("debian-legal") our company's confidential e-mail
> exchange.
This is incorrect terminology. Jorgen Hagg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
published a message, and used debian-legal to do so.
> This has been done without seeking our consent and we urge Debian to
> remove the entry and the follow-ups from its archive servers
> immediately.
Jorgen should be notified of his error in order not to repeat it. It's
unfortunate that he did not seek your consent. Unfortunately, there is no
way to remove that message from the thousands of servers it's on, and
there is no desire to remove it from any Debian archive server.
My statement applies to both the main message, this message I'm sending,
and any followups that might repeat the error.
If there is a correction or retraction in a message he posted, you might
ask Jorgen (or you might prefer to do so yourself) to post a follow-up
with correct information.
It's not clear from your message which address you prefer people not use,
but I presume it's [EMAIL PROTECTED] Posting a different
address to use is probably your best bet. If it's a huge problem, you
might consider disabling the incorrect address.
> The web address of the information:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/debian-legal-200012/msg00101.html
> and the follow-up letters ...
That's one possible web address of it, but it is archived on many
different servers. One of them is
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:nJ7INHUa-AAC:lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2000/debian-legal-200012/msg00101.html+eemuconcept%40eemuconcept.com&hl=en
Good luck!
--
Mark Rafn[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: debian-legal list entry - confidential information disclosure
"Anna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It came to our attention that Debian have published on one of their
> mailing lists ("debian-legal") our company's confidential e-mail
> exchange.
I don't know which address in those messages you mean.
Are you complaining about the mention of the various email addresses
at eemuconcept.com?
We certainly don't have any obligation to keep your email addresses
private.
Thomas
