On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 07:44:25PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
|| This is a woody vs. sarge difference. On sarge, linux/x25.h says:
||
|| struct x25_address {
|| char x25_addr[16];
|| };
||
|| so the current code, with sizeof(struct x25_address) is correct and
|| changing it would ac
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thursday 12 May 2005 20:18, Marc Haber wrote:
[ ... ]
> "UsePam yes" is generally a _big_ surprise for the local admin since
> it allows passwords to be used even if "UsePasswordAuthentification
> no" is set in sshd_config.
[ ... ]
I have exactly those set on a few hosts:
foohost:/var/log# egre
On Monday 16 May 2005 11:12, Frederik Dannemare wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2005 20:18, Marc Haber wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> > "UsePam yes" is generally a _big_ surprise for the local admin
> > since it allows passwords to be used even if
> > "UsePasswordAuthentification no" is set in sshd_config.
>
> [
HOLA debian-devel!, INTERRUMPO TU TAREA PARA ALGO IMPORTANTE
ESTAS SON LAS RAZONES POR LAS QUE
NO PODÉS DEJAR DE LEER ESTE TEXTO
Si vivís en Paraguay y…
estás pensando en cambiar de trabajo,
estás buscando trabajo,
conocés a alguien que está buscando trabajo y lo quieres ayudar,
estás ahora estu
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 04:21:13PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Last night (when I should have been working a project for my advanced
> algorithms class) I decided it was time to upgrade my personal server
> from Woody to Sarge. I am writing this email im the hopes that the
> release team an
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> If you happen to have a variable (or field or in fact any expression)
> of that type (either type "struct x25_address" or type "x25_address"),
> then you can take the size of the variable, instead of the size of the
> type.
Yes thats a good point, hmm:
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:06:37PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
|| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
|| {
||struct x25_route_struct rt;
||struct sockaddr_x25 sx25;
|| ...
||memset((char *) &rt, 0, sizeof(struct x25_route_struct));
memset((char *) &rt, 0, sizeof rt);
Do not have money , get software cds from here!
http://liztu.ipmflhitfs0pxji.turuntale.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Merci de me supprimer de cette mail-liste
Le 15 mai 05 à 18:34, debian-devel@lists.debian.org a écrit :
http://www.unserforum.com/aff/include.php?path=content/
content.php&contentid=149
http://www.unserforum.com/aff/include.php?path=content/
content.php&contentid=54
http://www.unserforum.com/a
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> H. I run with my own CA signed cert and had no problems with a
> Woody -> Sarge upgrade of sslwrap on Friday. Can you send me your
> /etc/sslwrap/debian_conf and the output of
> "grep sslwrap /etc/inetd.conf" (assuming you're running it from inetd)?
>
> J.
>
Did yo
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 09:27:23AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > H. I run with my own CA signed cert and had no problems with a
> > Woody -> Sarge upgrade of sslwrap on Friday. Can you send me your
> > /etc/sslwrap/debian_conf and the output of
> > "grep sslwra
Thank you for your comments!
Brian Hewitt
The Golf Channel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Jonathan McDowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 09:27:23AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> H. I run with my own CA signed cert and had no problems with a
> Woody -> Sarge upgrade of sslwrap on Friday. Can you send me your
> /etc/sslwrap/debian_
Vincent Zweije <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If you happen to have a variable (or field or in fact any expression)
> of that type (either type "struct x25_address" or type "x25_address"),
> then you can take the size of the variable, instead of the size of the
> type. So you can do:
> memcpy(
Short version:
Should users first upgrade dpkg and aptitude before upgrading the rest of
the system or can the upgrade safely be done using Woody's version of the
package tools?
Long version:
The current version of the release notes tells users to (simplified):
1. apt-get install aptitude
2. cha
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 05:58:24PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> Short version:
> Should users first upgrade dpkg and aptitude before upgrading the rest of
> the system or can the upgrade safely be done using Woody's version of the
> package tools?
>
> Long version:
> The current version of the rele
I demand that Steve Langasek may or may not have written...
> On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 05:44:33PM -0400, François-Denis Gonthier wrote:
>> On May 7, 2005 09:03 pm, Joey Hess wrote:
>>> erlang
>> Erlang and the related erlang-manpages and erlang-doc-html are being put
>> up-to-date by me. I have a
Replica Rolex Swiss Watches
http://coders.q67.net/rolex/vron/collided.html
Wishlist : Rolex or Cartier or Breitling
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Adrian Bunk [Mon, 16 May 2005 18:14:20 +0200]:
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 05:58:24PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > The current version of the release notes tells users to (simplified):
> > 1. apt-get install aptitude
> > 2. change the /etc/apt/sources.list to point to "stable"
> > 3. aptitude updat
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:44:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> * Adrian Bunk [Mon, 16 May 2005 18:14:20 +0200]:
> > On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 05:58:24PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
>
> > > The current version of the release notes tells users to (simplified):
> > > 1. apt-get install aptitude
> > > 2.
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:44:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>
> 1. apt-get install aptitude
> 2. change the /etc/apt/sources.list to point to "stable"
> 3. aptitude update
> 4. aptitude install aptitude dpkg
> 5. aptitude -f --with-recommends dist-upgrade
0. change the /etc
I am not sure whether the ipfwadm package should be removed. Kernels up to
2.4 still have support for ipfwadm filtering rules, so theoretically people
could still be using it with current kernels.
cc'ing debian-devel. If the consensus there is that the package should be
removed, I'll request its
100 Assorted Life Fixers
http://www.q67.net/ph/coupon/patbeile
Hate recieving these msgs q67.netf.php
He would, wouldn't he?
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 09:49:01AM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
> I am not sure whether the ipfwadm package should be removed. Kernels up to
> 2.4 still have support for ipfwadm filtering rules, so theoretically people
> could still be using it with current kernels.
>
> cc'ing debian-devel. If th
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
I intend to package PySQLite 2. It will happily coexist with the
current python-sqlite package, which has another API.
URL:
http://pysqlite.org
Description:
pysqlite a DB-API 2.0-compliant database interface for SQLite.
SQLite is a relational datab
Thank you for contacting the CoreComm online Residential Customer
Care Repair Department! We have received your message and a
Customer Care Representative will be responding to you within the
next 48-72 business hours.
In the meantime, please feel free to visit our repair
troubleshooting site,
On May 16, Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am not sure whether the ipfwadm package should be removed. Kernels up to
> 2.4 still have support for ipfwadm filtering rules, so theoretically people
> could still be using it with current kernels.
Wait until sarge has been released and then
On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 08:12:04PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:44:37PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
>...
> > Note that in (4), the command is aptitude, not apt-get.
>
> Does this make any difference?
>...
It does.
My fault, I confused (4) with (3).
cu
Adrian
--
On May 13, 2005, at 11:28, Humberto Massa Guimarães wrote:
You said it yourself. Even if your 256MB machine were typical (it's
not), the less cache memory you use to cache dentries of /usr/lib,
the better (more memory for your apps, or to cache other, more
useful stuff).
If you suspect that s
On May 15, 2005, at 22:16, Steve Langasek wrote:
Still, the concerns about re-adding this software version (which
has been
out of testing for months) via t-p-u remain.
Its hard to see it being any worse than freeswan, which has been
abandoned for a while by its upstream. And if it turns out to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vincent Zweije) writes:
> On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 12:06:37PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
>
> || In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> || {
> ||struct x25_route_struct rt;
> ||struct sockaddr_x25 sx25;
> || ...
> ||memset((char *) &rt, 0, sizeof(struct x2
On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 12:07 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Quoting Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > * Roberto C. Sanchez:
> >
> >> I forwarding this to d-d since after a couple of days I
> >> still have no response from anyone on d-m willing to sponsor
> >> this package.
> >
> > Pleas
Jonathan Oxer wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-05-12 at 12:07 -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
>>Quoting Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>
>>>* Roberto C. Sanchez:
>>>
>>>
I forwarding this to d-d since after a couple of days I
still have no response from anyone on d-m willing to sponsor
>>
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On May 13, 2005, at 11:28, Humberto Massa GuimarÃes wrote:
>>
>> You said it yourself. Even if your 256MB machine were typical (it's
>> not), the less cache memory you use to cache dentries of /usr/lib,
>> the better (more memory for your apps, or t
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I do believe you've missed the point. Splitting /usr from / helps in a
> teeny percentage of cases, and most of the cases where it "helps" that
> have been mentioned here, it actually doesn't. Yet, splitting /usr/lib,
> which is grotesquely huge
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>2. change the /etc/apt/sources.list to point to "stable"
I wish all documentation is using the distribution names not the symbolic
names. If you put "stable" in a file this will cause major trouble a few
years later. Beside it is unclear to the reader
Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The difference being that Debian has already split /usr from / and
> therefore is only paying the marginal cost of maintaining it, whereas
> Debian has not split /usr/lib from /usr/libexec and would have to pay the
> (far larger) initial cost of moving ev
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
>> I do believe you've missed the point. Splitting /usr from / helps in
>> a teeny percentage of cases, and most of the cases where it "helps"
>> that have been mentioned here, it actually doesn't.
>
> Well, I think it
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> I do believe you've missed the point. Splitting /usr from / helps in
> a teeny percentage of cases, and most of the cases where it "helps"
> that have been mentioned here, it actually doesn't. Yet, splitting
> /usr/lib, which is grotesquely huge and har
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
I do believe you've missed the point. Splitting /usr from / helps in
a teeny percentage of cases, and most of the cases where it "helps"
that have been mentioned here, it actually doesn't.
Well, I think it helps in the case of network mounting it; it is easier
to mount
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The difference being that Debian has already split /usr from / and
>> therefore is only paying the marginal cost of maintaining it, whereas
>> Debian has not split /usr/lib from /usr/libexec and would hav
42 matches
Mail list logo
