> "bare minimum" doesn't extend to a compilation environment.
> or to printing, IMO.
> > * netbase and netstd should both be there, they are standard
> >on Unix
It seems as though the implicit definition of "standard Unix system"
omits a declaration of intended usage.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FR
John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By the current definition of Important:
> * Sendmail should be there instead of smail since people expect
>sendmail
People expect a mailer. Debian's default mailer is exim^H^H^H^Hsmail;
that's a deliberate decision to override the commonly expected
> * gcc should be in Important because everybody expects a C compiler
Maybe they expect it, but these days, they don't *get* one... none of
solaris, hpux, irix ship with a [working] C compiler...
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Tr
Brian White:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>multimedia Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Multimedia has been supersceded by mctools-lite, and is not present in bo or
hamm. None of my other packages use this obsolete address.
--
see shy jo
I've been on vacation - sorry for any delay in thi
On Jun 25, Peter Tobias wrote
> If every package has to use it why not add this function to dpkg?
> dpkg already keeps a file with the contents of each packet. This
> could be extended to keep the permissions too. Or create a database
> with contains every filename (just like "locate") and the perm
John Goerzen wrote:
>
> OK, then I suspect the policy is at fault. (BTW, I checked it out and
> I did find dc and bc on SunOS -- I had not known these programs were
> on other OSs.)
>
> By the current definition of Important:
[snip]
> * lilo should not be there because lilo is not part of UNIX
From: Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * it will cost bandwidth when you just want to install either
> binary-only or doc-only, using FTP
>
> * further more, it will cost money to users as pay for local calls,
> here in France
>
> * it will cost disk-space on mirror sites, as debian will probabl
> *) The default format should be HTML, but everything necessary to
> view the documents should be provided as part of the base system.
> This includes a default HTML viewer (lynx), which users can override
> by means of the update-alternatives method. It would also include
> a default HTML server,
Colin Plumb wrote:
>Actually, MD5 is still holding up, but Dobbertin has indeed dented it.
>Frankly, it would take a *hell* of a determined attacker to manage
>to turn it into a successful securitty exploit if it's used for
>file checksums.
I agree here. Still, it's probably better to move away
OK, then I suspect the policy is at fault. (BTW, I checked it out and
I did find dc and bc on SunOS -- I had not known these programs were
on other OSs.)
By the current definition of Important:
* Sendmail should be there instead of smail since people expect
sendmail
* dpkg-dev should not b
From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> This quotation is not complete and thus incorrect!
OK - I just wanted to make sure the policy direction wasn't going toward
un-bundling all documentation. Sorry!
Bruce
--
Bruce Perens K6BP [EMAIL PROTECTED] 510-215-3502
Finger [EMAIL PROT
On Jun 25, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I still have problems with that. What you describe is the eventual
> scenario, correct? But right now it lacks functionality, because not
> every packages uses it. So maybe we should add a new rule in our
> policy.
If every package has to use it why not add this
Philip Hands writes:
> There is of course a problem with trying to install all the documentation on
> a
> machine, since some conflicting packages provide man pages with overlapping
> names.
I think that the 'alternative' mechanism could be used there.
--
Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
h
Bruce Perens writes:
> From: Philip Hands <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I think we should aim to get all documentation into separate packages.
>
> Please don't do this. Deity will have the capability to exclude installation
> to certain directories (like /usr/doc) based on a system "policy file".
On Jun 25, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote
> yes, i would like to install files into debian/tmp without being root,
> but currently it doesn't work without root. and to delete debian/tmp/*,
> i also have to be root :-(
>
> if you have too much time (or someone else): go ahead and write a
> wrapper.
On Jun 25, joost witteveen wrote
> The only problem with this is that if there are setuid binaries involved
> in the debian/rules binary process, they will not use the LD_PRELOAD
> stuff, and things may go wrong. (But as long as those binaries are
> setuid root, they wouldn't need the libfakeroot).
On Jun 25, Roman Hodek wrote
>
> > if you create files and directories as root, you also need to be
> > root, to delete them. but this is far easier, of course.
>
> You shouldn't be root, so you don't create files/dirs as root...
yes, i would like to install files into debian/tmp without being r
On Jun 24, Tom Lees wrote
> If you really want to do this, LD_PRELOAD=/some/where/debian-perm.so
> from dpkg-buildpackage.
with such a library you would not need to change anything else (install,
chown, mknod ..) ? that would be a great help...
will this also fake a user id 0
(some install script
> knew about another attack), and they reduced the key size to 56 bit so
> they could crack it with brute force in massively parallell hardware.
Umm, no, part of the *problem* with lucifer is that the 128 bit key
had symmetries that made it's strength *trivially* less than 64 bit
and as I recall
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Nathan E Norman wrote:
>
> On 25 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
>
> :
> :> IBM developed a cypher called "lucifer". The NSA examined it,
> :> recommended some changes to the algorithm, and the result was DES.
> :
> :Changes which, we now know, *strengthened* it against differ
Michael Meskes:
> And why didn't you update libreadline2 (withoug 'g') too, as the
> dependency suggested? That worked like a charm for me.
Aha! I didn't look at the dependancies closely enough, and so I missed that
it just wanted another version of libreadline2, I thought it wanted it
removed.
Bruce Perens wrote:
> From: "Scott K. Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I have no problem when HTML is the provided upstream documentation source,
> > and don't want to cripple my ability to read that. However, when the
> > upstream source is something else, such as info/texinfo, I don't want HTML
On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Michael Meskes wrote:
> Is there soemthing like a real rescue disk? Or are we talking about the
> installation disks?
I was referring to "resq" installation boot disk.
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble
> Mark Baker wrote:
>
> [building as non-root]
>
> >what if the package
> >tries to set the ownership of a file from within another shell script or a
> >perl script; how can you intercept that so it works properly?
>
> Build a shared library which wraps all calls to chown(), then set
> LD_PRELOA
> "Philippe" == Philippe Troin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philippe> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997 20:13:13 +0200 Christian Schwarz
Philippe> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> Option 3: We ship .texi files and produce HTML and/or info files on
>> demand (in the postinst script).
Philippe> I like t
> "joost" == joost witteveen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, joost witteveen wrote:
>>
>> > (in fakt so much, that I may be tempted to write it myself. You
>> > don't need that many changes).
>>
>> Well, you need to write your own version of make that looks for any
> "Erik" == Erik B Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > "Christoph" == Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Christoph> Lilo 2.0 has the ability to display a file before the
Christoph> prompt and also the ability to boot something with a
Christoph> single keystroke. If so
Actually, MD5 is still holding up, but Dobbertin has indeed dented it.
Frankly, it would take a *hell* of a determined attacker to manage
to turn it into a successful securitty exploit if it's used for
file checksums.
All of RIPEMD-160, SHA-1 and MD5 are variants on MD4.
Frankly, I find the desig
[Sorry, Alex, I wanted to send this to you _and_ the mailing list in the
first time. So here it's again.]
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
Hi folks!
Please let me quote from my last mail, first:
> My prediction is that while a few people will like option 3) very much,
> it will
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Philip Hands wrote:
> > Even if we are, I'm sure it would be easier if every package `foo' had
> > one or more associated `foo-doc' packages.
>
> From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > We are currently planning such a thing
I still have problems with that. What you describe is the eventual
scenario, correct? But right now it lacks functionality, because not
every packages uses it. So maybe we should add a new rule in our
policy.
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager| topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
[EMAIL PRO
Is there soemthing like a real rescue disk? Or are we talking about the
installation disks?
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager| topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 52146 Wuerselen
G
> if you create files and directories as root, you also need to be
> root, to delete them. but this is far easier, of course.
You shouldn't be root, so you don't create files/dirs as root...
Roman
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
T
> In file included from /usr/include/linux/if.h:23,
> from /usr/include/linux/netdevice.h:30,
> from if.c:28:
> /usr/include/linux/socket.h:9: redefinition of `struct sockaddr'
Seems if.c includes , which in turn goes to
. With gli
Mark Eichin wrote:
>> IBM developed a cypher called "lucifer". The NSA examined it,
>> recommended some changes to the algorithm, and the result was DES.
>
>Changes which, we now know, *strengthened* it against differential
>cryptanalysis (which they new about in the 70's, and called the
>"slidin
And why didn't you update libreadline2 (withoug 'g') too, as the
dependency suggested? That worked like a charm for me.
Michael
--
Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager| topsystem Systemhaus GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is someone willing to test autocompiling ? my auto compiler script work
fine for me, i will do some cleanup, add command line options and
release them. thanks to sim tailor for a pc where i can test and compile
libc5 binaries. to run a full test, i will need a pc with a big disk
(debian source mirr
On Jun 25, David Frey wrote
> > *smile* Some german people have problems understanding swiss people, too.
> > :-)
>
> *smile* But only if they live too far in the north. Our Bavarian neighbours
> don't have this problem at least. >;-)
you can understand a bavarian ? hey, most german can't do t
On Jun 24, Roman Hodek wrote
>
> AFAICS, the only thing needed to be done as root is the install/chown
> stuff, right?
if you create files and directories as root, you also need to be root,
to delete them. but this is far easier, of course.
regards, andreas
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> I-search would take a Java-equpped browser as far as I can tell. It's
> not do-able all in free software today. That will not be the case forever.
Right. Also might be do-able as a hack in something like dwww
(assuming I understand what it's doing) or w
On Jun 24, Michael Meskes wrote
> It seems I misunderstood what suidmanager does.
>
> But I still don't see the reason for non-setuid programs listed there
> by default. Does that mean 'You can make this program suid, but we
> prefer it to be not-suid.'?
a) show the option : maybe you want to ma
From: Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That was me. I guess the cgi approach would make stuff like recursive
> incremental searches (a la C-s in the info tool) out of the question,
> but I kind of figured that was a losing battle.
I-search would take a Java-equpped browser as far as I can tell.
From: Mark Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> After all, as a *package maintainer*, I want it to be *difficult* for
> a user to accidentally not install documentation; I want them to have
> to deliberately go out of their way if they want to fail to install it.
That's how I feel.
Thanks
On 25 Jun 1997, Mark Eichin wrote:
:
:> IBM developed a cypher called "lucifer". The NSA examined it,
:> recommended some changes to the algorithm, and the result was DES.
:
:Changes which, we now know, *strengthened* it against differential
:cryptanalysis (which they new about in the 70's, and
James R. Van Zandt:
> Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> proposes:
> >
> > The documentation will be distributed via several packages:
> >
> > foo-doc-html for HTML docs
> > foo-doc-info for GNU info docs (where available)
> > foo-doc-xxx for oth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Perens) writes:
> Someone brought up the point of recursive regular-expression
> searching. Of course this should be done with a CGI script rather than
> as a browser facility, so that it would be browser-independent. One
> could build a tiny search engine with zgrep and
> IBM developed a cypher called "lucifer". The NSA examined it,
> recommended some changes to the algorithm, and the result was DES.
Changes which, we now know, *strengthened* it against differential
cryptanalysis (which they new about in the 70's, and called the
"sliding attack", if I remember
Christian Hudon:
> I hit a small problem while installing packages from
> Incoming... Bash now dumps core on startup. And one of the interesting side
> effects of this is that I can't install/remove packages anymore:
> The bash install failed because I didn't have libreadlineg2 installed. Then
>
That makes sense (using deity support for the exclusion, I mean.)
After all, as a *package maintainer*, I want it to be *difficult* for
a user to accidentally not install documentation; I want them to have
to deliberately go out of their way if they want to fail to install
it. (After all, I want th
Santiago Vila Doncel:
> On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, Christian Schwarz wrote:
> > Option 3: We ship .texi files and produce HTML and/or info files on
> > demand (in the postinst script).
Rather, I'd like us to ship .texi or .info files and produce html on demand
via dwww or some equivialnt.
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Philip Hands wrote:
> Even if we are, I'm sure it would be easier if every package `foo' had
> one or more associated `foo-doc' packages.
From: Christian Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> We are currently planning such a thing for our own manuals. The
> discussion was on debian-do
Lars Wirzenius:
> alien: contains object (alien-3.2/) not in expected directory
> (alien-3.3).
Sigh. I normally use a program to increment the version number and rename
the subdirectory of these debian-only packages like alien. But I released
alien 3.3 to frozen only, and didn't follow
On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, David Frey wrote:
[...]
> > ``Important programs, including those which one would expect to find
> > on any Unix-like system. If the expectation is that an experienced
> > Unix person who found it missing would go `What the F*!@<+ is going
> > on, where is foo', it should be
From: Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> What exactly is the rationale behind the HTML mandate?
We wanted to have a single interface to present all Debian documentation.
We looked at the various means of displaying documentation, and it was
clear that we could convert almost any documentation to HT
54 matches
Mail list logo
