[Bug 497732] Re: backuppc errors: "Tar exited with error 512 ()" due to read permission failures

This seems much higher-priority than "low" to me. To have the default install mysteriously fail hourly provides no confidence in backuppc, and saving critical system configuration data like password hashes is one of the main jobs of a backup tool. -- You received this bug notification because yo

[Bug 497732] Re: Tar exited with error 512 () status

** Description changed: + A default install of backuppc produces fails on an hourly basis like + this: + + Backup failed on localhost (Tar exited with error 512 () status) + + because it is trying to back up /etc and several files there are not + readable by the user which is doing the backup (

[Bug 264289] Re: file and folder names

I have a sense that I'm missing something here. What does this have to do with backuppc? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to backuppc in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/264289 Title: file and folder names To man

[Bug 782614] Re: make configuring DNSSEC validation easier

** Changed in: bind9 (Ubuntu) Status: New => Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is subscribed to bind9 in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/782614 Title: make configuring DNSSEC validation easier To manage notific

[Bug 713704] [NEW] etckeeper is not run on apt-get remove or apt-get purge

Public bug reported: Binary package hint: etckeeper etckeeper is not run during an apt-get remove or apt-get purge like it is during an apt-get install. This means that the version control system doesn't specifically track the changes in /etc that result from removing packages. I'm using a hook

[Bug 255368] Re: ebox: Depends: libapache-authcookie-perl but it is not installable

The server team discussed this at UDS and plans to do what is necessary to make eBox installable in Intrepid via an SRU (Stable Release Update: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates). Getting a minimal patch to fix it for Jaunty, based on the notes at https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/

[Bug 227464] Re: Please roll out security fixes from PHP 5.2.6

** Summary changed: - Please backport security fixes from PHP 5.2.6 + Please roll out security fixes from PHP 5.2.6 -- Please roll out security fixes from PHP 5.2.6 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/227464 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Server Team, which is

[Bug 231060] Re: packages dnsmasq and libvirt-bin conflict with each other

How about a more helpful error message? Perhaps libvirtd could notice that dnsmasq is already running and say "please disable dnsmasq on interface xyz". Or maybe dnsmasq itself could be noticing that? -- packages dnsmasq and libvirt-bin conflict with each other https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/

[Bug 237391] Re: ssh-keygen should default to dsa not rsa

>From one of your links I also reminded that: 'It is possible to implement the DSA algorithm such that a "subliminal channel" is created that can expose key data and lead to forgable signatures so one is warned not to used unexamined code.' - another strike against it. -- ssh-keygen should defau

[Bug 237391] Re: ssh-keygen should default to dsa not rsa

I expect that someone someday will again make a bad random number generator. Maybe some proprietary box that I am pressured to use. I don't want my keys to be vulnerable just because I use them on a machine that doesn't get RNGs right. DSA is vulnerable to that problem, and RSA is not. I agree

[Bug 237391] Re: ssh-keygen should default to dsa not rsa

Why? Based on recent events, I would think DSA would be considered worse, not better than RSA. E.g. from http://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys "any DSA key must be considered compromised if it has been used on a machine with a 'bad' OpenSSL. Simply using a 'strong' DSA key (i.e., generated with a 'good