Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Vincent Cheng
* Package name: dropbox
Version : 1.0.20-1
Upstream Author : Dropbox, Inc.
* URL : http://www.dropbox.com
* License : Proprietary
Section : non-free/net
Description : secure backup, sync and
On 2011-02-17, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> * Package name: dropbox
> Version : 1.0.20-1
> Upstream Author : Dropbox, Inc.
> * URL : http://www.dropbox.com
> * License : Proprietary
> Section : non-free/net
> Description : secure backup, sync and shari
On 2011-02-17, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> On 02/17/2011 05:07 AM, Robert Edmonds wrote:
>> i'm inclined to implement all three of these features and make them each
>> individually toggle-able via /etc/default/unbound, and to enable these
>> features by default
>
> in order to do that for the first tw
17.02.2011 07:07, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> hi,
>
> i'd like to get some feedback on whether i should implement some changes
> in the unbound debian packaging:
>
> * integration with resolvconf as a provider of recursive DNS
> resolution. (#562031)
>
> * retrieving a list of upstream
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Reinhard Tartler
* Package name: mplayer2
Version : 2.0beta1
Upstream Author : Uoti Urpala
* URL : http://www.mplayer2.org/
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : next generation movie player for Unix-
Hi,
Default homedir permissions are 755. World-readable (and listable).
Common (security) sense says that permissions that are not required
should not be granted. For example, accounts mysql and www-data should
not have access to my documents.
Some time ago I filed a bug related to this: 398793
T
* Olaf van der Spek [2011-02-17 13:51]:
> Default homedir permissions are 755. World-readable (and listable).
> Common (security) sense says that permissions that are not required
> should not be granted. For example, accounts mysql and www-data should
> not have access to my documents.
>
> Some
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> IIRC you are asked during installation if you want world readable home
> directories or not.
No you're not. Unless (I assume) you do an expert install. Even then,
non-world-readble means 751, not 750. The default should still change.
--
O
* Olaf van der Spek [2011-02-17 13:56]:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Martin Wuertele wrote:
> > IIRC you are asked during installation if you want world readable home
> > directories or not.
>
> No you're not. Unless (I assume) you do an expert install. Even then,
> non-world-readble mean
SEVEN KINGS
Officiel
Sons of the Gipsy Kings
Les fils des Gipsy Kings vous feront voyager dans la musique Gitane d'hier et
d'aujourd'hui SEVEN KINGS interprètent les plus beaux titres du répertoire des
GIPSY KINGS, leurs pères, et de nouvelles compositions qui vous attendent dans
cette tourné
Olaf van der Spek writes ("Default Homedir Permissions"):
> Default homedir permissions are 755. World-readable (and listable).
> Common (security) sense says that permissions that are not required
> should not be granted. For example, accounts mysql and www-data should
> not have access to my docu
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek writes ("Default Homedir Permissions"):
>> Default homedir permissions are 755. World-readable (and listable).
>> Common (security) sense says that permissions that are not required
>> should not be granted. For example, accou
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:35:26AM -0800, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> * Package name: dropbox
> Version : 1.0.20-1
> Upstream Author : Dropbox, Inc.
> * URL : http://www.dropbox.com
> * License : Proprietary
> Section : non-free/net
> Description : sec
Olaf van der Spek writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
> chmod 755 ~ is not a hard way to remove the barrier.
We are arguing about defaults, so this is not a relevant answer.
> What are those assumptions based on?
I could ask you the same question. We are arguing in a vacuum.
I don't th
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 03:31:18PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Ian Jackson
> wrote:
> > Olaf van der Spek writes ("Default Homedir Permissions"):
> >> Default homedir permissions are 755. World-readable (and listable).
> >> Common (security) sense says that p
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
>> chmod 755 ~ is not a hard way to remove the barrier.
>
> We are arguing about defaults, so this is not a relevant answer.
In both cases it's easy to change permissions, but:
If
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 01:44:26PM +, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Perhaps it might be reasonable to try to find a way for accounts like
> msql and www-data not to be able to access home directories (add
> "daemon" to their supplementary group list and set the permissions of
> /home 0705 to root.daemon
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> In general, I think it's fair to say that the average Debian
> installation does not require Fort Knox levels of security. Simply
> allowing other people to read our files is often something desirable;
Does other refer to other users, all oth
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 09:55:48PM -0500, Ryan Kavanagh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:02:16PM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Decklin Foster wrote:
> > > rxvt-unicode is a total clusterfuck.
> >
> > if noone ever comes up (I am already overloaded somewhat) -- I
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 04:07:12PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > In general, I think it's fair to say that the average Debian
> > installation does not require Fort Knox levels of security. Simply
> > allowing other people to read our fi
[Someone] writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
> [stuff]
We are in danger of wasting a lot of time with this discussion.
The general pattern is that someone who is unhappy with the state of
the world proposes a substantial change. The worry amongst the rest
of us is that the change might
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 04:07:12PM +0100, Olaf van der Spek wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
>> > In general, I think it's fair to say that the average Debian
>> > installation does not require Fort Knox levels of
On to, 2011-02-17 at 15:24 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> I would argue that a change that /would/ make a real difference, would
> be to have (as an example) emblems in Nautilus that flag files and
> folders depending on if other people have read or write access. That
> would visually show what is (a
Hi,
On 17/02/2011 16:17, Ryan Kavanagh wrote:
> I've setup the pkg-urxvt team[0] for the several people interested in
> helping with the packaging. Please request to join. I'll file an ITA and
> import the packaging into git shortly.
Will there be more than the git repo ? If not, why don't you
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 14:52:49 +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:35:26AM -0800, Vincent Cheng wrote:
> > * Package name: dropbox
> > Version : 1.0.20-1
> > Upstream Author : Dropbox, Inc.
> > * URL : http://www.dropbox.com
> > * License
On Feb 17, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I disagree with this conclusion, because I disagree with the
> underlying implication that the general readability of files is not
> needed.
Agreed.
> Perhaps it might be reasonable to try to find a way for accounts like
> msql and www-data not to be able to acces
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 07:14, Ian Jackson
wrote:
> [Someone] writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
>> [stuff]
>
> We are in danger of wasting a lot of time with this discussion.
>
> The general pattern is that someone who is unhappy with the state of
> the world proposes a substantial chang
Austin English writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 07:14, Ian Jackson
> wrote:
> > [Someone] writes ("Re: Default Homedir Permissions"):
> >> [stuff]
> >
> > We are in danger of wasting a lot of time with this discussion.
> >
> > The general pattern is that someon
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 15:24 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Yes, but like everything there is a tradeoff. A totally secure system
> is an unusable system. Having to instruct every user how to relax the
> permissions to allow others to access their files, or allow their web
> pages to be visible, is e
]] Vincent Danjean
| On 17/02/2011 16:17, Ryan Kavanagh wrote:
| > I've setup the pkg-urxvt team[0] for the several people interested in
| > helping with the packaging. Please request to join. I'll file an ITA and
| > import the packaging into git shortly.
|
| Will there be more than the git rep
On 02/17/2011 09:46 AM, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> let me rephrase: the resolvconf options would be enabled by default, but
> would be no-ops unless resolvconf is installed. and i think the package
> would only Suggest: resolvconf.
thanks.
--
Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Due largely to the fact that I'm no longer using cacti on a regular basis,
I think cacti and spine should get a new maintainer.
Both packages are relatively up to date and in decent shape, and the upstream
authors are r
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
I request an adopter for libraw source package.
It is one of the build-dependencies of shotwell package.
Package: libraw-dev
Description: raw image decoder library (development files)
LibRaw is a library for reading RAW
On 02/17/2011 10:55 AM, Martin Owens wrote:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 15:24 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
Yes, but like everything there is a tradeoff. A totally secure system
is an unusable system. Having to instruct every user how to relax the
permissions to allow others to access their files, or al
On 02/17/2011 08:58 AM, Roger Leigh wrote:
[snip]
Should it be locked down like Fort Knox?
There's a heck of a lot of middle ground between "Fort Knox" and
"Hippy Commune".
Should it be generally usable, and easy for users to see each other's
stuff?
Only with the owner's permission. P
On 02/17/2011 09:24 AM, Roger Leigh wrote:
[snip]
Yes, but like everything there is a tradeoff. A totally secure system
is an unusable system.
Why the black and white? What happened to grey?
Having to instruct every user how to relax the
permissions to allow others t
A long time ago, tasksel installed task packages, which were regular
metapackages. This was dropped because the task packages had to Depend
on many packages, which made the installed system brittle, and made
testing propigation a problem. Now that Recommends are installed by
default, I'm revisitin
A Quinta 17 Fevereiro 2011 23:20:30 Joey Hess você escreveu:
[...]
> Note that a subset of cups is also installed as part of the desktop
> tasks, and it would also make sense to have a metapackage on the cups
> side that desktop tasks could use. The sole different currently is
> that openprinting
Martin Owens wrote:
> If public by default is the way we want to go, then why not have a
> Private folder be default in the users home directory? Combined with the
> indication emblem in nautilus; this might provide a space for users to
> put data. ATM it's too hard to teach users how to secure a f
Le Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 07:20:30PM -0400, Joey Hess a écrit :
>
> ### blends
>
> I think there is interest in getting some blends displayed in Taskel?
> It's mostly orthagonal to this proposal, but this would help with
> giving you full control over what your tasks do. I do feel that blends
> nee
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> it would be very exciting to have the possibility to select a blend at the
> installation. To circumvent the limitation of space, how about having a single
> line to select ‘Chose a Debian Pure Blend‘, that would lead to a page that
> provi
Hello,
During Squeeze installation process, since volatile archive was
replaced with squeeze-updates and error of unreachable archive occurs.
Of course installation process can be continued without any
consequences, but I'm guessing installer should be updated so new
users don't get confused with
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Smedegaard
* Package name: vargs
Version : 0~20100516-1
Upstream Author : Alexis Sellier
* URL : https://github.com/cloudhead/vargs
* License : Expat
Programming Lang: JavaScript
Description : function argu
I uploaded insighttoolkit the other day, but the buildd machines
refuse to build it, claiming an installability problem [1]:
insighttoolkit/alpha dependency installability problem:
insighttoolkit (= 3.20.0-8) build-depends on one of:
- python-vtk (= 5.4.2-8)
This is repeated for all ar
(Moving to debian-b...@lists.debian.org where it's more appropriate)
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011, Adnan Hodzic wrote:
> Hello,
>
> During Squeeze installation process, since volatile archive was
> replaced with squeeze-updates and error of unreachable archive occurs.
> Of course installation process can
45 matches
Mail list logo
