[Bug 1397965] Re: 00check-network-cable fails with bad variable name

2021-06-02 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
This bug was fixed in ifupdown-extra version 0.26 (uploaded to Debian in 2016): Changes: ifupdown-extra (0.26) unstable; urgency=medium . (...) * if-up-scripts/check-network-cable: - Fix the definition of LINK which fails due to variable name (Closes: #758798) (LP: 1397965) -- You

[Bug 1397965] Re: 00check-network-cable fails with bad variable name

2021-06-02 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
Fixed in version 0.26 ** Changed in: ifupdown-extra (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released ** Changed in: ifupdown-extra (Ubuntu) Assignee: (unassigned) => Javier Fernández-Sanguino (jfs) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, wh

[Bug 1204531] Re: Filesystem 'fuse.gvfsd-fuse' used by 'gvfsd-fuse' is not recognised as a valid filesystem

2020-09-20 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
This bug was fixed in tiger version 3.2.3-12, which is available since January 2014 from the changelog: * systems/Linux/2/gen_mounts - Added pstore (Closes: 733832) (LP: #1204531) - Fix typo: hugetlbf --> hugetlbfs (Closes: 729692) - Add fuse.gvfs-fuse-daemon as a filesystem an

[Bug 1204531] Re: Filesystem 'fuse.gvfsd-fuse' used by 'gvfsd-fuse' is not recognised as a valid filesystem

2020-09-20 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
Bug fixed in tiger version 1:3.2.3-12 ** Changed in: tiger (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1204531 Title: Filesystem 'fuse.gvfsd-fuse

Re: [Bug 549712] Re: Please, update translations of languages, they are really old.

2010-08-03 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
On Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 07:59:26PM -, Ricardo Pérez López wrote: > Many of the Ubiquity translations comes from debian-installer > translations, which in turn comes from Debian, i.e. the Debian (...) The Debian-installer translation is fairly complete. I'm not sure why this bug is forwarded to

[Bug 466] Re: Snort 2.3 Inline Support

2007-03-23 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
An updated Snort 2.6 would not be a free intrusion prevention system, even with inline support, as no signatures would be available. So it's rather useless (like an antivirus without signatures) and it would be only useful for those that pay up to Sourcefire for the latest ruleset. -- Snort 2.3 I

[Bug 56533] Re: version of snort in universe is dead

2007-03-23 Thread Javier Fernández-Sanguino
Snort is not a SIGNATURE BASED REACTIVE SECURITY DEVICE, users running Snort 2.3.x can use Oinkmaster to get new (VRT) rules if they have the need. Those that say that Snort 2.3 with the default rules it provided (which are way more than the current "GPL" ruleset at snort.org) is useless have no i