Bug#589071: netatalk: Fails to serve root volume

2011/7/5 Alan Snelgrove : > I found a work around for this Bug, which works for me. > in source package netatalk/etc/afpd/directory.c > there are the lines > >     if ((ret = lchdir(cfrombstr(dir->d_fullpath))) != 0 ) { >         LOG(log_debug, logtype_afpd, "movecwd('%s'): ret: %u, %s", >        

Bug#637025: netatalk: Upgrade package from 2.2~beta4 to 2.2.0

Hi guys,, 2011/8/17 Jonas Smedegaard : > On 11-08-16 at 01:34am, Stefano Rivera wrote: >> Apparently at some point I uploaded a netatalk backport to a Launchpad >> PPA, and people have been asking me to update it. I found the >> additional following issue when building it on oneiric: >> >> --- a/l

Bug#630349: netatalk: FTBFS on GNU/kFreeBSD

Hi guys, 2011/6/13 Jonas Smedegaard : > tags 630349 upstream > thanks > > On 11-06-13 at 11:38am, Petr Salinger wrote: >> the current version fails to build on GNU/kFreeBSD. > > Thanks for reporting, Petr! > > @Frank: Please have a look: http://bugs.debian.org/630349 fixed for 2.2.1. -f -- T

Bug#606005: netatalk: Internal Error after ad_open on sparc (server_child killed by signal 10)

2010/12/5 Alfredo Sola : > Package: netatalk > Version: 2.1.4-1 > Severity: important > Tags: patch upstream > > This happens with netatalk on sid and squeeze at least. There is a patch from > upstream at: >

Bug#579583: marked as done (netatalk: db version missmatch?)

2010/4/29 Jonas Smedegaard : > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 02:07:37PM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: >>> >>> From: Jonas Smedegaard >>> ... >>> This one is not a bug, however, but a shortcoming of upstream code which >>> cause breakage each time we bump the

Bug#579583: marked as done (netatalk: db version missmatch?)

> From: Jonas Smedegaard > ... > This one is not a bug, however, but a shortcoming of upstream code which > cause breakage each time we bump the BerkeleyDB version. Rescue is near though, from the manual [1]: "Note that the first version to appear after Netatalk 2.1 ie Netatalk 2.1.1, will suppor

Bug#568601: netatalk: PAM DHX2: libgcrypt versions mismatch

Hi Jonas, 2010/2/7 Jonas Smedegaard : > On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 01:11:11PM +0100, Frank Lahm wrote: >> >> 2010/2/6 Yuxuan Wang : >>> >>> after upgrade, the dhx2 auth is unusable, got the following log in >>> syslog: >>> >>> afpd[255

Bug#568601: netatalk: PAM DHX2: libgcrypt versions mismatch

2010/2/6 Yuxuan Wang : > Package: netatalk > Version: 2.0.5-3 > Severity: important > > > after upgrade, the dhx2 auth is unusable, got the following log in > syslog: > > afpd[25514]: PAM DHX2: libgcrypt versions mismatch. Need: 3086019268 It's trying to complain that the installed libgcrypt versi

Bug#565969: Re: Bug#565969: netatalk: Please avoid accidental linking against libssl [was: GPL-licensed software linked against libssl on buildds!]

2010/1/20 Fabian Greffrath : > Am 20.01.2010 16:34, schrieb Frank Lahm: >>> >>> # ./configure --with-openssl-dir=no|grep -i ssl >>> checking for SSL... /usr (enabling RANDNUM and DHX support) >>>    SSL: >>>        CFLAGS =  -I/usr/include/openssl

Bug#565969: Re: Bug#565969: netatalk: Please avoid accidental linking against libssl [was: GPL-licensed software linked against libssl on buildds!]

2010/1/20 Fabian Greffrath : >> Ahh, problem isolated: The proper option to use is >> --with-openssl-dir=no - so the convenient DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=openssl >> will be preserved :-) > > Sure?! > > # ./configure --with-openssl-dir=no|grep -i ssl > checking for SSL... /usr (enabling RANDNUM and DHX supp

Bug#559060: netatalk: FTBFS due to autoreconf issues when autotools are installed

2009/12/1 Cyril Brulebois : > Jonas Smedegaard (01/12/2009): >> My builds using cowdancer+pbuilder on amd64 and i386 with a fully >> up-to-date Sid shows no such things. > > Note I'm talking about porter boxes, so a bit more than just chroot + > Build-Depends. > >> Perhaps some environment variabl

Bug#533141: Current netatalk fails to build from source

2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard > >> You've asked those patches before, and I told you not (as upstream) > >> to worry about those pathces to autogenerated files): I agree that > >> they are not of concern for upstream. > > > >But you are *not* patching _generated_ files here. You are patching > >confi

Bug#533141: Current netatalk fails to build from source

2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:59:23AM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: > >2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:33:23AM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: > >> >2009/6/16 Itai Seggev > >> >> Any other suggestions? >

Bug#533141: Current netatalk fails to build from source

2009/6/16 Jonas Smedegaard > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:33:23AM +0200, Frank Lahm wrote: > >2009/6/16 Itai Seggev > >> Any other suggestions? > > > >Although you're only reporting this problem with a rc and the final is > >alread available, whatev

Bug#533141: Current netatalk fails to build from source

2009/6/16 Itai Seggev > Any other suggestions? Although you're only reporting this problem with a rc and the final is alread available, whatever causes your error may still be present. Therefore I'm digging into this and will be talkin to the libtool folks. Stay tuned. -Frank, Netatalk Developer

Bug#533141: Current netatalk fails to build from source

2009/6/15 Itai Seggev : > Package: netatalk > Version: 2.0.4~rc2-1 > Severity: serious > > Okay, perhaps I am cluless or there's something seriously wrong with my > system, > but this has never failed me in the past.  I am try to rebuild the package > from > source to enable openSSL. Please re-r

Bug#507538: AFP just allows 128 concurrent connections

Hi, MAXSRV does NOT set the maximum number of afpd connections! It sets the maximum number of cnid_dbd processes of which one is necessary per volume. What probably does affect the maximum number of possible afpd connections is the very low default value of fd_table_size (see man cnid_dbd) which