On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> They aren't reasonable things to add at the last minute. The search
>> happened, AFAICT there is a candidate, yet you had to object now. If it
>> was so reasonable, why didn't you mention it when it came up
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They aren't reasonable things to add at the last minute. The search
> happened, AFAICT there is a candidate, yet you had to object now. If it
> was so reasonable, why didn't you mention it when it came up?
> Reasonableness cannot be applied to concepts
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>>
>> >John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
>> >> barriers at this office isn't
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:
>John Galt wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:
>>
>> >John Galt wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
>> >> to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
>>
Hi,
Q1:
is http://security.debian.org/dists/ and
http://security.debian.org/debian-security/dists/ the same thing?
Q2: do i also need to have a line saying
deb http://security.debian.org/debian-non-US potato/non-US main
contrib non-free
for non-us update?
thanks
Mo
--
To UNSUBSC
John Galt wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:
>
> >John Galt wrote:
> >>
> >> It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
> >> to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
> >
> >Err... you have noticed that there are already
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> >John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> >> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
> >
> >How is it a barrier?
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Martin Schulze wrote:
>John Galt wrote:
>>
>> It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
>> to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
>
>Err... you have noticed that there are already two people filling
>this position
John Galt wrote:
>
> It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
> to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
Err... you have noticed that there are already two people filling
this position, haven't you?
Regards,
Joey
--
This is
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The whole problem here is they DIDN'T ask you. You threw in your two
>> cents worth without a corresponding pledge of support.
>
>It's a public mailing list, and I was simply contributing my
>suggestion.
Quite obvious when you look at it (DUH!)
Thanks for all who replied.
Marcel
Robert Davidson wrote:
> IP aliasing.
>
> Cya.
>
>
> Marcel Welschbillig wrote:
>
>> Can any one tell me the kernel option to enable on 2.2.17 to be able to
>> specify multiple ethernet addresses in the /etc/networ
IP aliasing.
Cya.
Marcel Welschbillig wrote:
>
> Can any one tell me the kernel option to enable on 2.2.17 to be able to
> specify multiple ethernet addresses in the /etc/network/interfaces file.
> ie. eth0 eth0:1 eth0:2 .. on the same physical interface ?
>
> I know it works on the stan
its called alias support, and can be found in networking options.
CONFIG_IP_ALIAS=y
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 12:29:36PM +0800, Marcel Welschbillig wrote:
>
> Can any one tell me the kernel option to enable on 2.2.17 to be able to
> specify multiple ethernet addresses in the /etc/network/interfac
Marcel Welschbillig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can any one tell me the kernel option to enable on 2.2.17 to be able
> to specify multiple ethernet addresses in the /etc/network/interfaces
> file. ie. eth0 eth0:1 eth0:2 .. on the same physical interface ?
>
> I know it works on the standar
Previously Marcel Welschbillig wrote:
> I know it works on the standard kernel but every time i compile my own
> kernel i lose the ability to do this.
Enable IP aliasing.
Wichert.
--
_
/ Nothing is fool-proof to a suffic
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The whole problem here is they DIDN'T ask you. You threw in your two
> cents worth without a corresponding pledge of support.
It's a public mailing list, and I was simply contributing my
suggestion. You decided it should be a big Federal case.
I'll m
Can any one tell me the kernel option to enable on 2.2.17 to be able to
specify multiple ethernet addresses in the /etc/network/interfaces file.
ie. eth0 eth0:1 eth0:2 .. on the same physical interface ?
I know it works on the standard kernel but every time i compile my own
kernel i lose
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> They aren't reasonable things to add at the last minute. The search
>> happened, AFAICT there is a candidate, yet you had to object now. If it
>> was so reasonable, why didn't you mention it when it came u
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> They aren't reasonable things to add at the last minute. The search
> happened, AFAICT there is a candidate, yet you had to object now. If it
> was so reasonable, why didn't you mention it when it came up?
> Reasonableness cannot be applied to concept
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>>
>> >John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
>> >> barriers at this office isn'
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>
> >John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> >> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
> >
> >How is it a barrier
It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Jason Thomas wrote:
>only one thing, does this have to go to both lists, I'm alot of messages
>twice, and yes they have different me
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
>> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
>
>How is it a barrier?
It's an extra qualification. It's one that until you
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:31:38PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> What does security policies for building a debian package exactly have
> to do with securing a debian box? System administrator reading this
> document will be interested in tips and howtos on improving the security
> on the boxes
only one thing, does this have to go to both lists, I'm alot of messages
twice, and yes they have different message id's.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:43:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throw
> Linux can do this as well - that's how the DMZ on our network is
> firewalled. I'd recommed inserting a DMZ box and using packet filtering
> on each of the boxes individually.
you should take a look at
http://lug.irk.ru/misc/iptables-tutorial-1.0.6.html#AEN690
there is more info about a DMZ fi
On 22/10/01, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> I am looking into the security policies outlined for package
> building, in order to include some notes regarding them in the section
> "How does Debian handle security" in the "Securing Debian Manual"
> (http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp)
Wh
It really didn't need to go to -devel in the first place: this is internal
to debian-security until there's a candidate. Folloups redirected.
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Jason Thomas wrote:
>only one thing, does this have to go to both lists, I'm alot of messages
>twice, and yes they have different m
On 22 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
>> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
>
>How is it a barrier?
It's an extra qualification. It's one that until yo
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:31:38PM +0200, Christian Kurz wrote:
>
> What does security policies for building a debian package exactly have
> to do with securing a debian box? System administrator reading this
> document will be interested in tips and howtos on improving the security
> on the boxe
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:30:56PM +0200, Alson van der Meulen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:17:59AM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> > I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
> > customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
> > filtering l
only one thing, does this have to go to both lists, I'm alot of messages
twice, and yes they have different message id's.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:43:05AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Thro
> Linux can do this as well - that's how the DMZ on our network is
> firewalled. I'd recommed inserting a DMZ box and using packet filtering
> on each of the boxes individually.
you should take a look at
http://lug.irk.ru/misc/iptables-tutorial-1.0.6.html#AEN690
there is more info about a DMZ f
On 22/10/01, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> I am looking into the security policies outlined for package
> building, in order to include some notes regarding them in the section
> "How does Debian handle security" in the "Securing Debian Manual"
> (http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp)
W
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:23:24AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Colin Phipps wrote:
> >The "barriers" to becoming a developer are mainly commitment to the
> >project and to the social contract, both of which should be
> >requirements for any security secretary. It doesn't imply pa
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:17:59AM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
> customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
> filtering load and logging. Also, with no access the Cisco box, you'd
> have to either M
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Should we improve lintian in order to yell if some (destructive) action is
> taken upon installation/de-installation? Should we further limit the kind
> of commands available on this scripts?
That would be a waste of time, IMHO. It would be trivial for a ma
> Excuse your arrogance, but let me correct you in some points you made!
>
> First of all nmap does not scan only the services listed
in /etc/services, if
> you were to have bothered reading the manual before answering you
would have
> read, and I quote:
If you had actually read what I'd wri
> Excuse your arrogance, but let me correct you in some points you made!
>
> First of all nmap does not scan only the services listed
in /etc/services, if
> you were to have bothered reading the manual before answering you
would have
> read, and I quote:
If you had actually read what I'd wri
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:30:56PM +0200, Alson van der Meulen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:17:59AM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> > I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
> > customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
> > filtering
I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
filtering load and logging. Also, with no access the Cisco box, you'd
have to either MASQ or SNAT with proxy arps if you do insert a firewall
into the packe
I am looking into the security policies outlined for package
building, in order to include some notes regarding them in the section
"How does Debian handle security" in the "Securing Debian Manual"
(http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp)
For example, I have been recently asked if a maint
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
How is it a barrier?
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
> /etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
the "IP address of my provider" is the IP address of the DNS serve
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:23:24AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Colin Phipps wrote:
> >The "barriers" to becoming a developer are mainly commitment to the
> >project and to the social contract, both of which should be
> >requirements for any security secretary. It doesn't imply p
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 05:23:02PM +0200, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
> /etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
Can
Your /etc/resolv.conf file should contain the ip addresses of
nameservers. Is that what you are referring to when you state "IP
address of my provider"?
On Mon, 2001-10-22 at 11:23, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fixe
Are you looking for effective traffic to your website? Look no further...
**
For the first time on the Internet, Trafficdelivered.com offers you a
centralised means or ordering high-quality traffic, with a members area wher
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 10:17:59AM -0700, tony mancill wrote:
> I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
> customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
> filtering load and logging. Also, with no access the Cisco box, you'd
> have to either
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Should we improve lintian in order to yell if some (destructive) action is
> taken upon installation/de-installation? Should we further limit the kind
> of commands available on this scripts?
That would be a waste of time, IMHO. It would be trivial for a m
> Excuse your arrogance, but let me correct you in some points you made!
>
> First of all nmap does not scan only the services listed
in /etc/services, if
> you were to have bothered reading the manual before answering you
would have
> read, and I quote:
If you had actually read what I'd wr
> Excuse your arrogance, but let me correct you in some points you made!
>
> First of all nmap does not scan only the services listed
in /etc/services, if
> you were to have bothered reading the manual before answering you
would have
> read, and I quote:
If you had actually read what I'd wr
I'd recommend the former (firewalling on each server). This will let you
customize the firewall for that server alone, and spread the packet
filtering load and logging. Also, with no access the Cisco box, you'd
have to either MASQ or SNAT with proxy arps if you do insert a firewall
into the pack
Hi,
I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
/etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
Regards
Hi,
Quoting Colin Phipps ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> > I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> > barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
> The "barriers" to becoming a developer are mainly co
I am looking into the security policies outlined for package
building, in order to include some notes regarding them in the section
"How does Debian handle security" in the "Securing Debian Manual"
(http://www.debian.org/doc/ddp)
For example, I have been recently asked if a main
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Colin Phipps wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>> On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>> >Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
>> >>
>> >>No. It is my understanding th
John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
How is it a barrier?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
> >>
> >>No. It is my understanding that it would be good to have "fresh
> >>blood"
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
> /etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
the "IP address of my provider" is the IP address of the DNS serv
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 05:23:02PM +0200, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
> /etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
Ca
Your /etc/resolv.conf file should contain the ip addresses of
nameservers. Is that what you are referring to when you state "IP
address of my provider"?
On Mon, 2001-10-22 at 11:23, Luc MAIGNAN wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
> fix
Are you looking for effective traffic to your website? Look no further...
**
For the first time on the Internet, Trafficdelivered.com offers you a centralised
means or ordering high-quality traffic, with a members area whe
On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
>>
>>No. It is my understanding that it would be good to have "fresh
>>blood" in the team. Working on security can cost a lot of time,
>>thus it
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can't make the ptrace exploit work on my 2.2.19 system... but I might
> be doing something wrong (I'm not quite sure what to expect). I get:
>
>attached
>exec ./insert_shellcode 30505
>execl: Operation not permitted
Since the bug
Hi,
I use an ADSL connection. The link seems to be up, because I can ping my own
fixed IP address. I have configureg the IP address of my provider in
/etc/resolv.conf, but I can't resolve any name. Where is the problem ?
Regards
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Hi,
Quoting Colin Phipps ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> > I take it then that you volunteer. If not, shut up. Throwing artifical
> > barriers at this office isn't going to add volunteers.
> The "barriers" to becoming a developer are mainly c
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Colin Phipps wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
>> On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>> >Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
>> >>
>> >>No. It is my understanding t
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 07:12:57AM -0600, John Galt wrote:
> On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> >Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
> >>
> >>No. It is my understanding that it would be good to have "fresh
> >>blood
Yes, you could definitely do a firewall on each server.
Also, have you considered setting up a 4th machine between the Cisco and 3
servers? That could work also. You wouldn't make it a masq box, just
configure it to pass packets based on the rules.
- James
-Original Message-
From: Also
On 21 Oct 2001, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
>Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Q: Is a requirement being a Debian developer?
>>
>>No. It is my understanding that it would be good to have "fresh
>>blood" in the team. Working on security can cost a lot of time,
>>thus i
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 12:44:03PM +0200, eim wrote:
> I've got some simple questions related to using a Firewall on
> some single pubblic Debian Boxes, I choose to post my questions
> here because I've always securitty in mind during the Developing
> time of my Network Services.
>
> Let me asume
I've got some simple questions related to using a Firewall on
some single pubblic Debian Boxes, I choose to post my questions
here because I've always securitty in mind during the Developing
time of my Network Services.
Let me asume I've got a simple Network with 3 Pubblic Debian
Servers and 1 C
Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can't make the ptrace exploit work on my 2.2.19 system... but I might
> be doing something wrong (I'm not quite sure what to expect). I get:
>
>attached
>exec ./insert_shellcode 30505
>execl: Operation not permitted
Since the bug
# netstat -anp|less
that works for me all the time
Without the darkness, how would you recognize the light?
-Original Message-
From: Ben S
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:54:28PM +0300, Juha J?ykk? wrote:
> I was wondering if there are any secure methods of centrally
> managing the versions of certain files on Debian machines.
The problem you describe (in the part of your email that I deleted) seems
to be not wanting to give access to
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 06:21:51AM -0300, Peter Cordes wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:06:03PM -0700, Garrett Ellis wrote:
> > I run Debian; and I applied the OpenSSH patch myself as soon as it was
> > posted.
> > Does anybody know of the advantages of waiting for a new .deb file to get
> > ci
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:06:03PM -0700, Garrett Ellis wrote:
> I run Debian; and I applied the OpenSSH patch myself as soon as it was posted.
> Does anybody know of the advantages of waiting for a new .deb file to get
> circulated are?
It's easier, esp. if you don't already have source for the
Yes, you could definitely do a firewall on each server.
Also, have you considered setting up a 4th machine between the Cisco and 3
servers? That could work also. You wouldn't make it a masq box, just
configure it to pass packets based on the rules.
- James
-Original Message-
From: Als
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 12:44:03PM +0200, eim wrote:
> I've got some simple questions related to using a Firewall on
> some single pubblic Debian Boxes, I choose to post my questions
> here because I've always securitty in mind during the Developing
> time of my Network Services.
>
> Let me asum
I've got some simple questions related to using a Firewall on
some single pubblic Debian Boxes, I choose to post my questions
here because I've always securitty in mind during the Developing
time of my Network Services.
Let me asume I've got a simple Network with 3 Pubblic Debian
Servers and 1
# netstat -anp|less
that works for me all the time
Without the darkness, how would you recognize the light?
-Original Message-
From: Ben
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:40:45AM +0300, Lauri Tischler wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> >
> > > I think the security secretary, if we have one, should be a Debian
> > > developer.
> >
> > We have two of them, and they are both card-carrying developers.
> >
> Unnghhh...
> 'Card-carrying' sounds
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:54:28PM +0300, Juha J?ykk? wrote:
> I was wondering if there are any secure methods of centrally
> managing the versions of certain files on Debian machines.
The problem you describe (in the part of your email that I deleted) seems
to be not wanting to give access to
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 06:21:51AM -0300, Peter Cordes wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:06:03PM -0700, Garrett Ellis wrote:
> > I run Debian; and I applied the OpenSSH patch myself as soon as it was posted.
> > Does anybody know of the advantages of waiting for a new .deb file to get
> > circul
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 09:40:45AM +0300, Lauri Tischler wrote:
> Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> >
> > > I think the security secretary, if we have one, should be a Debian
> > > developer.
> >
> > We have two of them, and they are both card-carrying developers.
> >
> Unnghhh...
> 'Card-carrying' sound
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 05:06:03PM -0700, Garrett Ellis wrote:
> I run Debian; and I applied the OpenSSH patch myself as soon as it was posted.
> Does anybody know of the advantages of waiting for a new .deb file to get
> circulated are?
It's easier, esp. if you don't already have source for the
Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
> > I think the security secretary, if we have one, should be a Debian
> > developer.
>
> We have two of them, and they are both card-carrying developers.
>
Unnghhh...
'Card-carrying' sounds like fiery-eyed anarchist or extreme left
revolutionary, some kind of luddite the
88 matches
Mail list logo
