Sorry for taking so long. I finally found that site you were
asking me about.Remember, the one that I used to
get a great
r/ate on my homel o
an? I was just looking around the other day
and they offerr a
te s at only 2.5 %. I am sure they can help you out.
http://www.searchrt.com/?m=2";>this lin
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 12:00:07 +0200, Dale Amon wrote:
>
> I'd like a black and white clarification of the impact
> of the change so I know for certain whether to be
> incredibly pissed off at the packager or not:
>
> "If I were to dselect today, would I still
>be able to print to fil
Has anyone invited our Mozilla packager to participate in this
discussion?
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabootu's Minister of Proofreading
http://www.jabootu.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTE
* Don Armstrong:
> Perhaps I've missed something, but everything that I've read in the
> threads so far amounts to people either assuming that there's an issue
> and not defining it, or attempting to figure out where the issue is.
This summary is correct as far as I can see. No real security iss
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Michael B Allen wrote:
> My impression was that the PostScript generator had the security
> issue
Can someone please state, for the record, definitively and precisely
what this "security issue" is?
The fact that PS is a turing complete language isn't a security issue,
beyond
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 11:19:03 -0400
Greg Folkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Excuse the cross posting, but many are "discussing" on all of these
> lists.
>
> On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 06:47, Magnus Therning wrote:
> > >
> > > "If I were to dselect today, would I still
> > >be able to print to f
On Saturday 10 July 2004 5:47 am, Magnus Therning wrote:
> >I'd like a black and white clarification of the impact
> >of the change so I know for certain whether to be
> >incredibly pissed off at the packager or not:
> >
> > "If I were to dselect today, would I still
> > be able to pr
* Jeroen van Wolffelaar:
>> Actually, it's rather time-consuming to determine if a security
>> vulnerability has been published. You have to discover the
>> publication, and then you have to decide whether it's actually the
>> same issue and if it's been disclosed completely.
>
> The first thing
Excuse the cross posting, but many are "discussing" on all of these
lists.
On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 06:47, Magnus Therning wrote:
> >
> > "If I were to dselect today, would I still
> > be able to print to file a website page
> > as ps?" [Y/N]
>
> Yes. Printing PS to a file is still p
Don't spend your hard earned money on overpriced Prescript-ions!
Why wouldn't you want to save some money?
Products for both Men and Women
http://xmnodm.com/tp/default.asp?id=gm03
http://xmnodm.com/er/r mv s.asp
On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 12:29:11PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Adrian von Bidder:
>
> > I think Jeroen is thinking about security problems the security team
> > already knows about but has not yet had time to handle (and which have
> > already been made public somewhere else.) Stupid if som
On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 12:47:18PM +0200, Magnus Therning wrote:
> Yes. Printing PS to a file is still possible.
Thanks. I had visions of all sorts of extra work in
order to just stand still. Now I can forget about this
and go back to writing my mail address verify
daemon...
--
On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 10:47:08AM +0100, Dale Amon wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 06:38:49PM -0500, Brad Sims wrote:
>> If you want postscript back; simply grab the source deb and roll your own;
>> just edit rules under the debian folder. Delete the '--with-xprint' and
>> '--disable-postscript'
* Adrian von Bidder:
> I think Jeroen is thinking about security problems the security team
> already knows about but has not yet had time to handle (and which have
> already been made public somewhere else.) Stupid if somebody has to
> search the sources *again* if the security team already ha
* Kevin B. McCarty:
> I admit this last question is a bit rhetorical. My point is that, as
> sysadmin of a physics cluster running Debian/woody on which people
> frequently look at downloaded PS files anyway, I want to know whether it
> is really worth my time to upgrade Mozilla [currently runnin
On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 06:38:49PM -0500, Brad Sims wrote:
> If you want postscript back; simply grab the source deb and roll your own;
> just edit rules under the debian folder. Delete the '--with-xprint' and
> '--disable-postscript' lines and do 'dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot'. However
> I did g
16 matches
Mail list logo
