On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 02:24:27PM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:
> > I think you're confusing the buildd admin with the porters. I expect
>
> Maybe that's because the buildd admins used to be the porters, and then,
> for some reason I do not understand, this mysteriously stopped being
> true.
Usuall
#include
* Steve McIntyre [Wed, Dec 20 2006, 06:29:04PM]:
> Gnome vs. KDE vs. XFCE
> ==
>
> The KDE and XFCE variants of CD#1 are now being produced to give more
> choice to people for initial installation. By default, CD#1 has always
> meant to be enough to install a fully-f
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Xavier Oswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libauthen-simple-passwd-perl
Version : 0.6
Upstream Author : Christian Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/C/CH/CHANSEN/Authen-Simple-Passwd
Wouter Verhelst a écrit :
> having one buildd maintainer per arch as opposed
> to a team will allow one to faster see recurring obscure problems that
> need fixing).
That's the theory. The reality shows the exact contrary, at least for arm:
- The chroot of "netwinder" is broken for weeks.
- "tofe
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Trent Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: ledger
Version : 2.5
Upstream Author : John Wiegley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://newartisans.com/ledger.html
* License : BSD
Programming Lang: C++
Description :
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Xavier Oswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: libauthen-simple-smb-perl
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Christian Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL :
http://search.cpan.org/CPAN/authors/id/C/CH/CHANSEN/Authen-Simple-SMB-0.1.
On Tue, Dec 26, 2006 at 09:21:31PM +, Paul Cupis wrote:
> I intend to hijack the eagle-usb source package.
Please remove s390 from the architectures, it is useless.
Bastian
--
Our way is peace.
-- Septimus, the Son Worshiper, "Bread and Circuses",
stardate
On Dec 30, Ryan Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Mail sender verification callouts
It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial
software.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 02:49:20PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > * Mail sender verification callouts
> It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial
> software.
There's nothing more anti-social in sender verification than in any other
similar check - if someone sends mail
Josip Rodin wrote:
There's nothing more anti-social in sender verification than in any other
similar check - if someone sends mail from an address that cannot be
delivered to, I don't want to accept it, because I can't deliver a reply to
them. If they want to talk to me, but won't accept replies
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:34:28AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote:
[...]
> The mail gateway, web scripts, and userdir-ldap command line interface
> have all been updated to deal with the new fields.
Thanks Ryan. As usual, you do the right thing. I'm still sad that we all
have to wait for you to get suff
On 10884 March 1977, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> * Mail sender verification callouts
> It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial
> software.
And if you would simply read the mail you would understand that this is
a per-user setting. If you dont like it - dont use it.
--
hi [& thanks Ryan for the work]
Ryan Murray ha scritto:
> The mail gateway, web scripts, and userdir-ldap command line interface have
> all been updated to deal with the new fields.
I connected to the web interface at
https://db.debian.org/update.cgi?id=mennucc1
I found fields for birthdate and
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 02:10:14PM +, Paul Waring wrote:
> I've seen a lot of announcement/verification emails (such as Amazon
> orders) which go out from an address that does not exist - presumably
> such emails would be blocked by sender verification?
Yes. Sender callout verification is ba
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 03:27:46PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
>> I've seen a lot of announcement/verification emails (such as Amazon
>> orders) which go out from an address that does not exist - presumably
>> such emails would be blocked by sender verification?
> Yes. Sender callout verification i
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 03:32:02PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> >> I've seen a lot of announcement/verification emails (such as Amazon
> >> orders) which go out from an address that does not exist - presumably
> >> such emails would be blocked by sender verification?
> > Yes. Sender callo
On 10884 March 1977, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
Hehe, reply to myself, but it didnt really fit for d-d-a.
> - If you whitelist hosts - dont bother to whitelist any .debian.org
>host, they are automagically whitelisted.
I personally would love, if you go and whitelist, that you also
whitelist the
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 04:31:12PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> - the birthDate field isn't currently available via the mail daemon,
>this will be fixed soon.
What about gender? How is it specified?
with a ldapsearch, I can find 1, 2 and 9...
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, ema
On Dec 30, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial
> > software.
> There's nothing more anti-social in sender verification than in any other
> similar check - if someone sends mail from an address that cannot be
> delivered to, I
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 04:37:15PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> I personally would love, if you go and whitelist, that you also
> whitelist the following set of hosts:
Wouldn't this be useful in the greylistd configuration on master, then?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Marco d'Itri wrote:
For a start that sites performing sender verification will partecipate
in a DDoS on the mail infrastructure of domains forged by spammers.
As we have started to collect stats, out of 1K connections, there are
from 30 to 50 connections that look like sender verify. This is q
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 04:44:06PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> > > It's sad to see Debian promoting and supporting use of antisocial
> > > software.
> > There's nothing more anti-social in sender verification than in any other
> > similar check - if someone sends mail from an address that cannot b
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:34:28AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote:
> * Mail greylisting
What happens with a mail which is delivered to an user with greylisting
enabled and one with it disabled?
> * Mail whitelist
> * Mail RBL list
> * Mail RHSBL list
What happens with this list
On Dec 30, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Um, that happens if your domain is used in spam to so many different mail
> servers and with so many various local parts (so as to avoid caching),
> and all that are three-verb SMTP conversations. TBH I've never actually
This happens often indeed
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:14:30PM +0100, Francois Petillon wrote:
> As we have started to collect stats, out of 1K connections, there are from
> 30 to 50 connections that look like sender verify. This is quite low right
> now but it could be harmful on big domains if more people use it.
Yes. Just
Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:34:28AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote:
>> * Mail greylisting
> What happens with a mail which is delivered to an user with greylisting
> enabled and one with it disabled?
>> * Mail whitelist
>> * Mail RBL list
>>
Hello Javier,
Am 2006-12-22 03:37:54, schrieb Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña:
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 06:51:58PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> > No, it works, but since "portmap" is not more (since Sarge)
> > installed by default it need arround 60-300 seconds to mount
> > but after this time
Hi,
Am 2006-12-22 03:27:43, schrieb Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña:
> > I can't find anything about this in the policy but to me it
> > doesnt make sense to use a locale if you dont want it for
> > some programs.
>
> Why would you *not* want a locale? If the program has l10n support and it
> pr
Am 2006-12-22 09:37:35, schrieb Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña:
> IMHO, either that software should be modified to support i18n text or the
> admin would have to choose wether he prefers to *understand* the logfile or
> to be able to parse it with automatic programs (I believe you are talking
> abo
* Paul Waring:
> I've seen a lot of announcement/verification emails (such as Amazon
> orders) which go out from an address that does not exist -
In the SMTP envelope? I strongly doubt that.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 03:14:45PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 05:34:28AM -0800, Ryan Murray wrote:
> [...]
> > The mail gateway, web scripts, and userdir-ldap command line interface
> > have all been updated to deal with the new fields.
> Thanks Ryan. As usual, you do the
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:13:57 +0100, Michelle Konzack
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Maybe the package maintainer do not want to get bugreports
>for his/her package in 100 differns languages?
You are - again - taking about something you don't understand.
For the record: I maintain two widely installe
Josip Rodin wrote:
Yes. Just like any other large amount of traffic could be harmful on
big domains.
I will be more precise. Answering a rcpt-to is, in my case, around 20 to
30% of the job of the "storage cluster" to deliver a mail (I am not
talking about CPU, just disks IOs). If the number o
Hi All!
On v, 2006-12-31 at 00:08 +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>
> For the record: I maintain two widely installed packages which are
> translated to a gazillion of languages (exim4 and adduser, to be
> exact), and I have never received a non-english bug report.
Then you lucky or your packages do it
34 matches
Mail list logo
