On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 05:02:51PM +0200, Thomas Hood wrote:
> Resolvconf supports both mode A and mode B and allows switching between them.
> With resolvconf installed, (A) so long as a local forwarding nameserver is
> running, resolv.conf points to this nameserver and thus rarely changes; but
"Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer" writes:
> And DEP5 is fine as long as you don't hit a source wich makes it grow
> above 12k+ lines. Then it becames a real PITA.
This usually means you're doing it wrong. Comprehensive copyright-format
1.0 files for some of my packages with over 20 differen
On Friday 28 June 2013 13:28:59 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer (2013-06-27 19:42:16)
[snip]
> So if adopted and up-to-date, it will be the correct (and will also be
> up-to-date - that's obviously implied from it being, ahem, up-to-date).
On a second thought
Clint Adams writes:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:35:51PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Upstream-Contact was put into DEP-5 because it was already required
>> contents in debian/copyright according to Policy, which says:
>> Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its
>> co
On Friday 28 June 2013 13:28:59 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer (2013-06-27 19:42:16)
>
> > On Thursday 27 June 2013 11:19:40 Alexandre Rebert wrote:
> > > > I do not think that you should try to implement this immediately
> > > > but from a Debian Maintainers
Le Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:35:51PM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>
> Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright
> information and distribution license in the file
> /usr/share/doc/package/copyright. This file must neither be compressed
> nor be a symbolic
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:35:51PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Upstream-Contact was put into DEP-5 because it was already required
> contents in debian/copyright according to Policy, which says:
>
> Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright
> information and di
Paul Wise writes:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> BTW, -1 for duplicating information as Upstream-Contact in d/upstream
>> as long as it resides in d/copyright. I'm fine if this field is moved
>> from d/copyright to d/upstream but I'm against having the same value in
>
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> BTW, -1 for duplicating information as Upstream-Contact in d/upstream as
> long as it resides in d/copyright. I'm fine if this field is moved from
> d/copyright to d/upstream but I'm against having the same value in two
> different files.
I
Le Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 11:38:21AM +0200, Mathieu Parent a écrit :
>
> Dep12 [1] doesn't have a Security-Contact field. Should we add one?
> (and maybe a Security-Submit?)
Hi Mathieu,
the contents of the debian/upstream files is open-ended. You can start anytime
to document and promote the use
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Barry Warsaw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
* Package name: python-pytest-instafail
Version : 0.1.0
Upstream Author : Janne Vanhala
* URL : https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pytest-instafail
* License : BSD
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: "Martín Ferrari"
* Package name: larch
Version : 1.1.2
Upstream Author : Ryan Grove
* URL : http://github.com/rgrove/larch
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: Ruby
Description : A tool to copy messages from one I
On 28/06/13 09:34, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On Thu, June 27, 2013 22:16, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> On 27/06/13 21:44, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Daniel Pocock:
>>>
However, are such issues at the discretion of package maintainers and
upstream, or is it useful to have a uniform Debian app
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libmodule-build-tiny-perl
Version : 0.023
Upstream Author : Leon Timmermans
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/Module-Bui
Ian Jackson wrote:
> The two designs lead to different sets of fixes.
>
> A. resolv.conf is a static file which changes only very rarely.
> Implications:
> 1. Existing DNS client applications do not need to change.
> 2. DNS service should always be provided at a fixed address
> 3. T
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libextutils-installpaths-perl
Version : 0.009
Upstream Author : Leon Timmermans
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/ExtUti
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libextutils-helpers-perl
Version : 0.021
Upstream Author : Leon Timmermans
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/ExtUtils-He
Package: wnpp
Owner: gregor herrmann
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,debian-p...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: libextutils-config-perl
Version : 0.007
Upstream Author : Leon Timmermans
* URL : https://metacpan.org/release/ExtUtils-Con
Alexandre Rebert schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> I am a security researcher at Carnegie Mellon University, and my team
> has found thousands of crashes in binaries downloaded from debian
> wheeze packages. After contacting ow...@bugs.debian.org, Don Armstrong
> advised us to contact you before submitting ~1.2K
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> 2. http://www.dsd.gov.au/publications/csocprotect/sha-1_deprecated.htm
>
When you read gov or NIST recommendation you need to take into account the
fact that they need to keep the current signatures to be still
cryptographically strong in 1
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:28:59PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > But even if adopted and up to date, it doesn't means that's the
> > correct way of dealing with upstream. Many addresses will be of former
> > developers, and in most situations it will not be the best way to
> > contact upstr
Quoting Charles Plessy (2013-06-28 00:07:55)
> Le Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:28:15AM -0400, Alexandre Rebert a écrit :
> >
> > > I wished the respective report would have been sent to the
> > > upstream developers, not to Debian. We could have been a second
> > > resort when upstream does not react
Quoting Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer (2013-06-27 19:42:16)
> On Thursday 27 June 2013 11:19:40 Alexandre Rebert wrote:
> > > I do not think that you should try to implement this immediately
> > > but from a Debian Maintainers point of view we now could present a
> > > case where it makes p
Paul Wise, 2013-06-28 17:23:53 +0800 :
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>
>> Did I missed something?
>
> Did you mean to send this to ad...@alioth.debian.org?
Given how such has repeatedly asked for help over the years, the
increased visibility may not be a bad thing.
>
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 11:38:21AM +0200, Mathieu Parent wrote:
>
> Dep12 [1] doesn't have a Security-Contact field. Should we add one?
> (and maybe a Security-Submit?)
+1
BTW, -1 for duplicating information as Upstream-Contact in d/upstream as
long as it resides in d/copyright. I'm fine if thi
2013/6/28 Charles Plessy :
> Le Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:28:15AM -0400, Alexandre Rebert a écrit :
>>
>> > I wished the respective report would have been sent to the upstream
>> > developers,
>> > not to Debian. We could have been a second resort when upstream does not
>> > react to the reports (no
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Did I missed something?
Did you mean to send this to ad...@alioth.debian.org?
I'm guessing that it was either deliberate or a consequence of the
recent upgrade of alioth to wheezy.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UN
Hi,
On 28.06.2013 05:51, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> After reading the man page my sponsor and I agreed that he should run:
>
>dcut dm --uid 'er...@mega-nerd.com' --allow libsndfile --allow
> libsamplerate --allow sndfile-tools
>
The correct syntax is
dcut dm --uid 'er...@mega-nerd.com'
On 06/28/2013 10:46 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:31:47AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>>
>>> Some examples from the man page:
>>>
>>>$ dcut dm --uid "Paul Tagliamonte" --allow glibc
>>>$ dcut dm --uid 0x0DEFA
Hi,
I'm aware that there was some change of the VCS location and that also
lintian recommends using svn://anonsvm.debian.org/svn instead of
svn://svn.debian.org/svn. Today I realised that the later even stoped
working when realising that
$ svn checkout svn://svn.debian.org/svn/debian-med/trunk/p
On Thu, June 27, 2013 22:16, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 27/06/13 21:44, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Daniel Pocock:
>>
>>> However, are such issues at the discretion of package maintainers and
>>> upstream, or is it useful to have a uniform Debian approach to
>>> cryptographic strength?
>>
>> Keep in
31 matches
Mail list logo
