On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 11:09:27AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Yes, OpenPGP lets you sign uids. (I even think that you can *only*
> sign uids, but this may be my misconception.)
Yes, you can only sign UIDs. When you sign someone's key (or rather, a
UID on someone's key) you are certifying
Hello,
this is just to say that my homepage is moving from
http://anonimo.isr.ist.utl.pt/~etienne/
to
http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/~etienne/
the octave, bloksi etc directories have been moved there. Sorry for
the inconvenience.
Etienne
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAI
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> first, dpkg-shlibdeps checks a few shared objects files which
> resides in the packages own subdir in /usr/lib, since they are
> just some sort of plugins, but shlibdeps complains:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of libmla_mdata_netmask.so not
> reco
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Signing the key itself rather than an identity on the key wouldn't
> really have much point - it is pretty much self evident that a GPG key
> is a GPG key and it would be hard to attach much more meaning to a
> signature on the key itself than that.
I tho
On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 10:11:52PM +0200, Othmar Pasteka wrote:
> hi,
>
hi :)
>
> second, i get the lintian warning:
> W: modlogan: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath ./usr/bin/modlogan
> /usr/lib/modlogan
>
> i can't really tell what's wrong with this ... please enlighten
> me here as well.
>
be
Hi!
I've got a little dilemma and I'm sure more experienced DD can help me
with it.
I'm packaging a log analyzer (fwlogwatch) that can execute a couple of
scripts depending on some events. These scripts can be tuned by local
administrator to fit his needs. I wanted to make them conffiles since i
hi,
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 01:49:03PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> > first, dpkg-shlibdeps checks a few shared objects files which
> > resides in the packages own subdir in /usr/lib, since they are
> > just some sort of plugins, but shlibdeps complains:
> > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of
I think it would be better to modify those scripts to `source' some
configuration files from /etc/fwlogwatch. That way, the administrator
wouldn't need to touch the scripts in /usr/sbin, yet, there would be a
way to tweak them.
However, it might not be trivial to do so (I didn't look at the
packa
Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Should I make them conffiles?
Either that. Or seperate the things that an admin would likely tune
into a conffile that is sourced by the script. The latter is
appropriate for large scripts containing only small "user-servicable"
parts.
> In
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of libmla_mdata_netmask.so not
> > > recognized
> > Do ldd and objdump -p work correctly on the files?
>
> yes they do afaict
Ah, I see clearly now: dpkg-shlibdeps means that the format of the
*name* of libmla_mdat
On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 11:09:27AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Yes, OpenPGP lets you sign uids. (I even think that you can *only*
> sign uids, but this may be my misconception.)
Yes, you can only sign UIDs. When you sign someone's key (or rather, a
UID on someone's key) you are certifying t
Hello,
this is just to say that my homepage is moving from
http://anonimo.isr.ist.utl.pt/~etienne/
to
http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/~etienne/
the octave, bloksi etc directories have been moved there. Sorry for
the inconvenience.
Etienne
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> first, dpkg-shlibdeps checks a few shared objects files which
> resides in the packages own subdir in /usr/lib, since they are
> just some sort of plugins, but shlibdeps complains:
> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of libmla_mdata_netmask.so not
> recog
Mark Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Signing the key itself rather than an identity on the key wouldn't
> really have much point - it is pretty much self evident that a GPG key
> is a GPG key and it would be hard to attach much more meaning to a
> signature on the key itself than that.
I thou
On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 10:11:52PM +0200, Othmar Pasteka wrote:
> hi,
>
hi :)
>
> second, i get the lintian warning:
> W: modlogan: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath ./usr/bin/modlogan
> /usr/lib/modlogan
>
> i can't really tell what's wrong with this ... please enlighten
> me here as well.
>
be s
Hi!
I've got a little dilemma and I'm sure more experienced DD can help me
with it.
I'm packaging a log analyzer (fwlogwatch) that can execute a couple of
scripts depending on some events. These scripts can be tuned by local
administrator to fit his needs. I wanted to make them conffiles since it
hi,
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 01:49:03PM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> > first, dpkg-shlibdeps checks a few shared objects files which
> > resides in the packages own subdir in /usr/lib, since they are
> > just some sort of plugins, but shlibdeps complains:
> > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of
I think it would be better to modify those scripts to `source' some
configuration files from /etc/fwlogwatch. That way, the administrator
wouldn't need to touch the scripts in /usr/sbin, yet, there would be a
way to tweak them.
However, it might not be trivial to do so (I didn't look at the
packag
Alberto Gonzalez Iniesta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Should I make them conffiles?
Either that. Or seperate the things that an admin would likely tune
into a conffile that is sourced by the script. The latter is
appropriate for large scripts containing only small "user-servicable"
parts.
> In
Othmar Pasteka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: format of libmla_mdata_netmask.so not
> > > recognized
> > Do ldd and objdump -p work correctly on the files?
>
> yes they do afaict
Ah, I see clearly now: dpkg-shlibdeps means that the format of the
*name* of libmla_mdata
20 matches
Mail list logo
