Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 01:25 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Not all of us are using window managers that grok .desktop > entries. Indeed, I would think that instead of having gnome menus, > kde menus, and Debian menus, we should dump the first two before we > dump the latter, since the Debian menu is something that we control, > and is something that benefits _all_ Debian users, not just a subset. though honestly, i think the "debian menu" is inferior to the "upstream menu" layout found in kde/gnome from a user standpoint. perhaps i'm not the only one who finds the debian menu a little clunky, crufty and out of date? that's not to say i don't appreciate what it does. ideally, there ought to be some kind of way to either generate .menu/xpm-format files from .desktop files or vice versa (with appropriate automagical section mapping). sean signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Rebirth of Status of Maintainer's packages and bugs and more
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 09:25:00AM -0500, Yaroslav Halchenko wrote: > So, now my silly question follows, isn't there any way to get read-only > access to at least BTS on some lower level (eg direct access to > DB) to implement more efficient querying of the data? There is the LDAP interface: http://people.debian.org/~aba/bts2ldap/ Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- Computer Science PhD student @ Uny Bologna, Italy [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ?/\All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema\/right keys at the right time signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Thu, Jan 18, 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Because as a Debian maintainer of gnome programs that work > even when you are not using gnome, you are not just supporting people > who use gnome, you are supporting _all_ Debian users. Yes, but if 90% of the users of these packages do not use the Debian menu it gets lower priority than the other tasks. Beside, my remark is taken out of context: it was not meant to imply we should drop the Debian menu altogether as you imply, but as a criticism of the current technical problems of the Debian menu which makes it a maintenance burden. -- Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bjusty Toanned Blond HOTBMOMS Suhows Bhig Bcoobs
Smexy HOTMEOMS Wioman In Cuamisole Plays With Vmibrator Blond HOTMBOMS Pslumper Saucking Txiny Ymoung Doick To different minds, the same world is a hell, and a heaven. http://list.minasrol.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Generating the Debian menu from .desktop files?
Dear all, I have read some contradicting statements in the discussion about the menu systems, and it is sometimes confusing. I will try to summarise: * The GNOME menu is better because it is cleaner. Although .desktop files apply to each menu system which are following the FreeDesktop recommendations, we learned that entries can be removed from the non-GNOME menu with "OnlyShowIn=GNOME". Actually, there is also the possibility of using a "NotShowIn" field. I co-maintain non-gnome packages, and created .desktop files or ad[a|o]pted some from Ubuntu (1). Shall I "NotShowIn=GNOME" the programs in these packages? This is a very serious question: if all developpers who maintain a package with a menu file create a .desktop file, there will not be a big difference between the GNOME and the Debian menu anymore... For the moment, as there no policy against adding a .desktop whenever it is possible, and as it is helpful for at least one distribution based on Debian, I systematically create a .desktop file, even if there is no icon available, for instance. * Icon format. In some cases, I created icons, so I had the choice for the format. xpm has a great advantage over png: when Debian is the upstream author, adding binaries to a package is a pain which has to be managed through uuencode in order to generate a .diff.gz. Being an ascii format, xpm makes the things much easier. However, I would agree to swich to png if somebody convinced me that there are good reasons for. Actually, the next time I will create an icon, I will opt for the svg format, and use imagemagick to convert it to xpm (or png) at build time, at least for the menu file. Can every window manager using FreeDesktop menus display SVG? * .desktop as the future and Debian menu as the past. First of all, it has been said that if the GNOME menu (or KDE, or XFCE...) would not provide all available graphical programs, there would need a non-command line mean to start them. Therefore, whatever the technology behind, I agree that the Debian menu should be kept. However, I also agree that it is boring and error-generating to maintain menu entries in two separate files in separate formats. The .desktop format has one great advantage: it supports internationalisation. Therefore, I would welcome attempts to evolve the Debian menu system to this format. Also, as Ubuntu volunteers are actively creating .desktop files starting from the Debian menu files (at least for the science pacakges), the transition should be fairly easy. I am not really good at programming, so I will not voluteer to work on the evolution of the menu system. But if it happens, I do volunteer to help for the transition. Have a nice day, (1) https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/NoDesktopFile -- Charles Plessy http://charles.plessy.org Wako, Saitama, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: X-Debbugs- headers
Hi Don! On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:37:13 +0100, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Luca Capello wrote: >> Never tested, but FWIU in the page I linked [1], you can use the >> pseudo-headers [2]. So, again, never tested, something like the >> following should do the work: >> = >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: ITP foo -- a bar viewer >> >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org > > This is incorrect. You need to use > > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Thank you for the correction. > You can use any of the X-Debbugs-... headers in the psuedoheaders, > but they must be prefixed with X-Debbugs-. The converse is not true. So a question arises: which are the other X-Debbugs-... headers? The reportbug manual mentions only X-Debbugs-CC, while /etc/reportbug.conf contains a commented line for X-Debbugs-No-Ack. Thus, I (erroneously) thought that Package: & Co. were available also as X-Debbugs-..., which seems to not be the case. As English isn't my mother language, is it me or the section at [1] isn't so clear? Especially the last sentence: Finally, if your MUA doesn't allow you to edit the headers, you can set the various X-Debbugs- headers in the pseudo-headers. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca Footnotes: [1] http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting#miscpseudoheaders pgp4FA73xDx8b.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#407442: general: few free disk detection
Package: general Severity: wishlist On a filesystem which might fragment on low disk space(such as ext2/ext3), might be the system should detect this condition, and inform, in some way, the root, and the user who tries to write on this disk, or the user which has moste data on this disk, that unusefull files should be removed. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-2-686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407446: general: automatic mount network share in filesystem.
Package: general Severity: wishlist samba network share might be automagically mouted in file system. share partage on computer machine from domain domaine, with user utilisateur shoud be available in filesystem throw: /network/samba/domaine/machine/utilisateur/partage/SomeFoldersFromRemoteComputer In the same way that processes are available with /proc. The only technical issue I see is when to provide password, and how to store them. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.17-2-686 Locale: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (charmap=ISO-8859-15) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Archive signing key for 2007?
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:21PM +0100, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a wrote: > I thought that the 2007 key was (based on [1]) supposed to be available > early in January and available in the debian-archive-keyring package. Which > doesn't seem to be the case. The key we'll be using (and indeed are already using) is available as: http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-key-4.0.asc It's expected to be valid until sometime after lenny is released. If you've upgraded a testing/unstable system in the past month or two, you'll find that key has been automatically added to your apt key list, after being verified by the normal trust path for upgraded packages -- namely the current archive key you've been using, then the sha1sum of the Packages file and finally the md5sum of the apt package containing the updated key. Debian developers can obtain the key from merkel over ssh, by looking in /srv/ftp.debian.org/web/archive-key-4.0.asc. The key id is 6070D3A1 which can be obtained from the key servers with signatures from both me and Steve Langasek. Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#407442: general: few free disk detection
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Jean-Michel wrote: > Package: general > Severity: wishlist > > On a filesystem which might fragment on low disk space(such as > ext2/ext3), > might be the system should detect this condition, and inform, in some > way, the root, and the user who tries to write on this disk, or the user > which has moste data on this disk, that unusefull files should be > removed. There are already disk quotas for that, and the system admin is free to use them or not. Are you trying to imply that disk quotas should be mandatory? Please be more specific, not just about the feature you have in mind (which I still don't fully understand), but also about why do you think lack of such feature is a bug. [ While doing so, please remember that this is Unix, not Windows ]. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Mirror with lzma compressed packages
Lars Wirzenius wrote: > I'm not sure if the smaller size that LZMA allows is worth it if it then > takes a lot longer to unpack files Unfortunately, that is already the case today. I have a local mirror via gigabit as I build multiple livecd images on a daily basis. For the KDE flavour, this takes less than two minutes for downloading the packages, but about 5 minutes for unpacking them. This is done on a reasonable fast i386 machine (3.2ghz, 1gb ram, two 250gb barracudas in raid0). Now, if we change from gzip to a slower algorithm, the unpack part will take even more time for this :/ -- Address:Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://people.panthera-systems.net/~daniel-baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Generating the Debian menu from .desktop files?
* Charles Plessy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070118 14:28]: > However, I also agree that it is boring and error-generating to maintain > menu entries in two separate files in separate formats. The .desktop > format has one great advantage: it supports internationalisation. Which the Debian menu support since before freedesktop even started to exist. (It was a bit limited as it was written in the thought to generate seperate menus for each language and only later get the support to put them all in one file easily as it is needed to generate .desktop file, but that is quite old stuff, too). Same by the way with not showing some entries in some programs. On the one hand it allows to add new types for stuff only applicable to special menus (like fvwm-modules only to be shown in fvwm and so on). And also supports to mark some entries to not show up in some programs. KDE for example used this to not show entries in the Debian menu that already were in their special menu. Don't know what they currently do. I personally do install neither Gnome nor KDE nowadays and let users only choose between the working solutions. Gnome and KDE got so broken by design and "not-invented-here, there must be an inferior solution we can choose" that it just got too much hassle support it. And just to repeat myself over the years: Please do not abuse the term userfriendlyness to solicit solutions only fitting to some hypothetical users. If you do not want people confused about different programs for the same task, don't install the other programs. And if there are different programs needed by different users, make all of them visible. The only thing confusing people more than too many programs for a task in my experience are different menus in different environment so one pal/colleaque suggesting the one sm/wm and another pal/colleaque showing them some program in their wm and they cannot find it in their account, though it is the same computer... Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407446: general: automatic mount network share in filesystem.
On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Jean-Michel wrote: > Package: general > Severity: wishlist > > > samba network share might be automagically mouted in file system. > > share partage on computer machine from domain domaine, with user utilisateur > shoud be > available in filesystem throw: > > /network/samba/domaine/machine/utilisateur/partage/SomeFoldersFromRemoteComputer > > In the same way that processes are available with /proc. > > The only technical issue I see is when to provide password, and how to > store them. If you are the only user in your machine, why don't you just use /etc/fstab for that? Or are you suggesting that the system should "guess" (by way of unknown magic) every shared folder on every computer for every user in /etc/passwd? [ Remember again that this is Unix, a multiuser operating system ]. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?
On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:42:21PM -0800, Jeff Carr wrote: > On 01/16/07 20:22, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Thus their goal is to help win market share, > > That's an important goal. How about we don't care about the crap that is "market share", but only about the things that really matter, such as "is it useful"? If "it takes some getting used to, but after that it's much more useful than what most people use" is what Debian gets known by, then I'm quite sure our "market share" will start rising, too. Yes, market share is useful to some extent, since at the very least it helps in getting more interesting brains working on our system. But if "market share" gets in the way of quality, then "market share" can go where the sun don't shine. -- Home is where you have to wash the dishes. -- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Archive signing key for 2007?
Anthony Towns wrote: > The key we'll be using (and indeed are already using) is available as: > > http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-key-4.0.asc > > It's expected to be valid until sometime after lenny is released. I feel that we've been pretty miserable at communicating this stuff to our developers and our users. While I knew about the etch key (hard to miss it, given the ugly behavior it caused in apt when the archive was signed with it, before it reached debian-archive-keyring), it wasn't at all clear that it would be used to sign anything other than etch. I've tried to update http://wiki.debian.org/SecureApt to reflect what you've said. I'm still not clear what will happen to the still existing yearly signing key though. It's hard to predict what will happen if we reach 2007-02-07 and 2D230C5F expires. I think that due to #400526, it will at least break debmirror. If we're phasing out the yearly signing key, we should be sure to stop signing the archive with it, before it expires. Obviously, if we're not phasing it out, we have a rapidly shrinking window to create the 2007 key. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Archive signing key for 2007?
Anthony Towns writes: > On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 11:51:21PM +0100, Javier Fern?ndez-Sanguino Pe?a > wrote: >> I thought that the 2007 key was (based on [1]) supposed to be available >> early in January and available in the debian-archive-keyring package. Which >> doesn't seem to be the case. > > The key we'll be using (and indeed are already using) is available as: > > http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-key-4.0.asc > > It's expected to be valid until sometime after lenny is released. > > If you've upgraded a testing/unstable system in the past month or two, > you'll find that key has been automatically added to your apt key list, > after being verified by the normal trust path for upgraded packages -- > namely the current archive key you've been using, then the sha1sum of > the Packages file and finally the md5sum of the apt package containing > the updated key. Interesting -- are there any formal procedures for the official signing key? I mean, how is the key generated, where is it stored, who has access to it, is it on an online machine etc? I think describing this would be useful, as a case-study of how to manage an important key on a best-effort basis. /Simon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Archive signing key for 2007?
On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 01:55:06AM +1100, Anthony Towns wrote: > The key we'll be using (and indeed are already using) is available as: > > http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-key-4.0.asc Thanks for the info. Maybe I've missed something, but I though there was going to be one key per year (indeed, that's what I documented in the Securing Debian Manual [1]) : "The Debian archive signing key is available at http://ftp-master.debian.org/ziyi_key_2006.asc (replace 2006 with current year)." Using a different naming convention from last year is certainly confusing. Why the 4.0? Because of etch? Could it be possible to properly define what naming convention will be used so that users can have a guideline where to download the latest key from? It might be necessary for users that are do not have the latest version of debian-archive-keyring installed, find issues when upgrading and have to take manual steps to include the latest key. Regards Javier [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/securing-debian-howto/ch7.en.html#s-check-releases > > It's expected to be valid until sometime after lenny is released. > > If you've upgraded a testing/unstable system in the past month or two, > you'll find that key has been automatically added to your apt key list, > after being verified by the normal trust path for upgraded packages -- > namely the current archive key you've been using, then the sha1sum of > the Packages file and finally the md5sum of the apt package containing > the updated key. > > Debian developers can obtain the key from merkel over ssh, by looking > in /srv/ftp.debian.org/web/archive-key-4.0.asc. The key id is 6070D3A1 > which can be obtained from the key servers with signatures from both me > and Steve Langasek. > > Cheers, > aj > signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#407468: ITP: cwiid -- Linux interface to the Wiimote
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Romain Beauxis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: cwiid Version : 0.3.51 Upstream Author : L. Donnie Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://www.wiili.org/index.php/CWiid * License : GPL Programming Lang: C Description : Linux interface to the Wiimote CWiid is a Linux interface to the Wiimote written in C. The goal of this project is to develop a working userspace driver along with various applications implementing event drivers, multiple wiimote connectivity, gesture recognition, and other Wiimote-based functionality. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.18.5-mactel Locale: LANG=fr_FR, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR (charmap=ISO-8859-1) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#407468: ITP: cwiid -- Linux interface to the Wiimote
Hi, On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 18:57:41 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote: > CWiid is a Linux interface to the Wiimote written in C. is there any reason this needs to be mentioned in the package description? I'd think most users don't care, and those who do can use debtags to find out. Cheers, Julien -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#407468: ITP: cwiid -- Linux interface to the Wiimote
Le jeudi 18 janvier 2007 19:21, Julien Cristau a écrit : > Hi, Hi ! > On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 18:57:41 +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote: > > CWiid is a Linux interface to the Wiimote written in C. > > is there any reason this needs to be mentioned in the package > description? I'd think most users don't care, and those who do can use > debtags to find out. No at all, simply I was too lazy to change the website description, but I'll do it for the package obviously ! Romain -- 'mama say son, I ain't got no food today tit for tat, butter for fish there's a little porridge in the dish
Re: Archive signing key for 2007?
* Anthony Towns: > The key we'll be using (and indeed are already using) is available as: > > http://ftp-master.debian.org/archive-key-4.0.asc > > It's expected to be valid until sometime after lenny is released. Thanks a lot for stopping the yearly key rollover madness. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Icons and instructions for the FreeDesktop menu.
Jeff Carr wrote: > On 01/17/07 00:22, Loïc Minier wrote: > > > The Debian menu system is completely useless to me, and I expect to > > most GNOME and KDE users. > > You've hit the nail on the head. That whole thing came about from > earlier times. I wish you every luck in purging it from existence. But you both forget that there are GNOME users who use apps without a .desktop entry and the only way to start them is through the Debian menu. Opening a terminal just horrifies them. All my colleagues are such users.
Bug#407483: ITP: gpe-mininet -- network connectivity monitor for GPE
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: gpe-mininet Version : 0.7 Upstream Author : Jean Tourrilhes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/download/source/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: C Description : network connectivity monitor for GPE Network connection checking panel applet for the GPE Palmtop Environment. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-2-amd64-k8 Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#407488: ITP: gpe-screenshot -- screenshot application for GPE
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: gpe-screenshot Version : 0.4 Upstream Author : Rene Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://gpe.linuxtogo.org/download/source/ * License : GPL Programming Lang: C Description : screenshot application for GPE Capture screenshots within the GPE Palmtop Environment. -- System Information: Debian Release: 4.0 APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-2-amd64-k8 Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: localisation in system wide daemons
Manoj Srivastava wrote: > > Hindu is an adjective that describes someone whose faith is > hinduism. It is not a language. > > manoj And, according to Merriam-Webster[1], a native or inhabitant from India. [1] http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=hindoo -- Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Debian Mirror with lzma compressed packages
On Friday 19 January 2007 02:19, Daniel Baumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For the KDE flavour, this takes less than two minutes for downloading > the packages, but about 5 minutes for unpacking them. This is done on a > reasonable fast i386 machine (3.2ghz, 1gb ram, two 250gb barracudas in > raid0). Now, if we change from gzip to a slower algorithm, the unpack > part will take even more time for this :/ Last time I checked the gzip source had no assembler optimisation for systems other than i386. So if your 3.2GHz machine (which obviously would be a P4 at least not an i386) is running the AMD64 instruction set then you could probably improve performance by running the 32bit binary. A compression algorithm that is more complex (slower) than the gzip algorithm but which is implemented in 64bit assembler might compare well with the current gzip performance for modern machines. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://etbe.blogspot.com/ My Blog http://www.coker.com.au/sponsorship.html Sponsoring Free Software development -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
