Re: Debian in Sanger (Re: update on binary upload restrictions)

[Andreas Tille]

On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Tim Cutts wrote:


What I'd actually like is some sort of non-root packaging system so
that users could build software with decent dependency checking for
their shared software infrastructure.   Can dpkg be cajoled into
doing that?


I've heard about "click" (or "klick") which can be used on Knoppixish
live CDs and perhaps something else.  Never tested it because I have
my personal opinion about such stuff, but perhaps it is worth
investigating into this direction.  Also LinSpire is doing something
like that if I'm not misleaded and I have rumors that they opened
the system.

Just two vague ideas

 Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: For Those Who Care About: Switzerland/Liechtenstein

[Sam Hocevar]

On Fri, Feb 02, 2007, martin f krafft wrote:

> PS: Almost all... as first official act, I herewith announce the
> nomination of Mark J. Ray as an honorary member of debian.ch.
> Honorary members have no rights and no obligations, but they also
> cannot quit.

   Is that legal?

-- 
Sam.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: etch's upgrades during life cycle

[Russell Coker]

On Friday 02 February 2007 06:49, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What i am saying is: is it possible to in a lenny or lenny++ change the
> > way debian upgrades it's stable, just for the kernel?
>
> There are few plans how to add one more kernel in the middle of Etchs
> life time to support more hardware - reality will show us how good we
> match that.

Is it certain that a kernel alone will be enough?  Might there be changes 
required to x.org, fdisk, udev, hal, and other things for new hardware?

Another possible reason for a new package is discovering bugs in code that has 
potential security issues.  Currently we release new packages to fix security 
problems, but AFAIK we don't fix potential issues.  I recall the mremap() 
kernel security issue that was discovered by the bad guys after it was fixed 
as a non-security issue in the kernel.org repository.  Maybe some similar 
fixes could be candidates for inclusion.

What about documentation changes?  If package foo-doc changes then it has 
little potential for serious regression, and if the old version of the 
document was misleading in a bad way then it could justify an upgrade.

-- 
[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]

Re: Debian in Sanger (Re: update on binary upload restrictions)

[Gabor Gombas]

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:10:56PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:

> What I'd actually like is some sort of non-root packaging system so  
> that users could build software with decent dependency checking for  
> their shared software infrastructure.   Can dpkg be cajoled into  
> doing that?

I knew people who were doing this with rpm. AFAIK the only tricky part
was the pre-seeding of the RPM database with some packages that were
installed on the system level (like libc) so the dependency tracking
could work. dpkg also has a "--root ..." option, but unfortunately dpkg
seems to check for root privileges before trying to install a package so
it is pretty much useless.

Gabor

-- 
 -
 MTA SZTAKI Computer and Automation Research Institute
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
 -


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: For Those Who Care About: Switzerland/Liechtenstein

[Michael Banck]

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 09:33:01AM +0100, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007, martin f krafft wrote:
> 
> > PS: Almost all... as first official act, I herewith announce the
> > nomination of Mark J. Ray as an honorary member of debian.ch.
> > Honorary members have no rights and no obligations, but they also
> > cannot quit.
> 
>Is that legal?

debian-devel is a development list, please take this to -curiosa or
-project (or, preferably, -elsewhere).


thanks,

Michael


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian in Sanger (Re: update on binary upload restrictions)

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Tim Cutts]
> No.  The network admin didn't like the idea of all the mail  
> messages.  I think I might just ignore him though.  :-)

Newer versions of popularity-contest deliver via HTTP, so you should
have that worry any more.

I see from popcon.debian.org we have 26962 submissions currently.  And
the rate of increase have not slowed down yet.  I guess people are
installing a lot of etch machines. :)

Friendly,
-- 
Petter Reinholdtsen


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Attempts at security (was Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature)

[paddy]

On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 11:49:23PM +1100, Russell Coker wrote:
> 
> One of the enemies of security in Debian is the fact that every person 
> controls their little area and has no requirement to work towards common 
> goals (apart from the most obvious ones of making the system work).
> 
> This means that instead of having a little cooperation from other developers 
> anyone who wants to get a significant change included will have to fight 
> hundreds of battles.

This is not a bug, it is a feature ;-)

Regards,
Paddy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Attempts at security (was Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature)

[Russell Coker]

On Friday 02 February 2007 22:21, Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> > > If you want a general purpose hook, or some crazy SE-Linux-specific
> > > feature, then you should probably propose one.  Personally I think a
> > > general purpose hook feature would probably be abused so should not be
> > > provided, and I think SE-Linux is no more than an interesting research
> > > project and should not be deployed (ever) so obviously we shouldn't
> > > have any code in dpkg for it.
> >
> > I'm curious, do you have the same attitude towards non-executable stack
> > (Exec-Shield/PaX/OpenWall), Poly-Instantiated directories, and PIE
> > executables?
>
> This is rather off-topic

So let's move it back to debian-devel where it's on-topic.

> but since you ask, no, I don't have the same  
> attitude towards those.  My objection to SE Linux is based on the
> complexity required to make anything of it, and as we all know
> complexity is the enemy of security.  SE Linux makes the situation
> worse, not better.

One of the enemies of security in Debian is the fact that every person 
controls their little area and has no requirement to work towards common 
goals (apart from the most obvious ones of making the system work).

This means that instead of having a little cooperation from other developers 
anyone who wants to get a significant change included will have to fight 
hundreds of battles.

SE Linux is a classic example of this.  Debian could have had SE Linux support 
long before Fedora, but instead it gets it long afterwards.

The same battles occur with regard to all the other security measures I 
mentioned (and some others I didn't).  We could made Debian the most secure 
Linux distribution, there are many people who have the skills and the 
interest in doing so.

You want features such as exec-shield, well you don't get them - because of 
other people with the same attitude as you.

> > I'm just wondering if you want Debian to have less security than
> > Fedora in all areas.
>
> Have you stopped beating your wife ?

No Ian, it was an entirely serious and sensible question.  If you wanted no 
extra security features then your attitude would make sense.  If you want 
features in other areas then the best strategy for you to adopt would be to 
refrain from actively preventing work on adding optional features that you 
don't intend to use.

When you take a deliberately obstructive attitude towards my SE Linux work it 
means that I have less time to work on other projects - many of which are 
related to improving Debian security.

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://etbe.blogspot.com/  My Blog

http://www.coker.com.au/sponsorship.html Sponsoring Free Software development

Re: Debian in Sanger (Re: update on binary upload restrictions)

[Tim Cutts]

On 2 Feb 2007, at 10:28 am, Gabor Gombas wrote:


On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 08:10:56PM +, Tim Cutts wrote:


What I'd actually like is some sort of non-root packaging system so
that users could build software with decent dependency checking for
their shared software infrastructure.   Can dpkg be cajoled into
doing that?


I knew people who were doing this with rpm. AFAIK the only tricky part
was the pre-seeding of the RPM database with some packages that were
installed on the system level (like libc) so the dependency tracking
could work. dpkg also has a "--root ..." option, but unfortunately  
dpkg
seems to check for root privileges before trying to install a  
package so

it is pretty much useless.


Yes, indeed, because --root does a chroot() which requires root  
privilege.  What I'm basically after is a dpkg-alike that uses a  
different root directory, but without using a chroot, so that non- 
root users can use it.


Tim


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#409367: ITP: iceape-locales -- language packs for Iceape

[Robert Luberda]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Robert Luberda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* Package name: iceape-locales
  Version : 1.0.7
  Upstream Author : SeaMonkey Translators
* URL : 
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/seamonkey/releases/1.0.7/contrib-localized/
* License : MPL
  Description : language packs for Iceape

Hi,
As I've already maintain iceape-locale-pl, I've been asked 
by Alexander Sack to maintain a unified source package for 
all Iceape locales. So here's an ITP for such a package ;)

The following binary packages will be created:

 Main packages:Transitional packages:
   --
iceape-locale-be
iceape-locale-camozilla-locale-ca
iceape-locale-csmozilla-locale-cs
iceape-locale-demozilla-locale-de-at
iceape-locale-frmozilla-locale-fr
iceape-locale-he
iceape-locale-itmozilla-locale-it
iceape-locale-plmozilla-locale-pl
iceape-locale-ru


Preliminary package (unfinished, not tested, lacks rebranding) can be 
found at http://pingu.ii.uj.edu.pl/~robert/iceape-locales/

Best Regards,
robert


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian in Sanger (Re: update on binary upload restrictions)

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:09:59 +, Tim Cutts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:  

> Yes, indeed, because --root does a chroot() which requires root
> privilege.  What I'm basically after is a dpkg-alike that uses a
> different root directory, but without using a chroot, so that non-
> root users can use it.

I do this using UML and a copy-on-write fs to play around
 with.  One can have bunches of cow_fs files lying around, for the
 same root_fs.  There was even a script somewhere which set up a
 structure for per user swap and cow file systems.

manoj
-- 
Breast Feeding should not be attempted by fathers with hairy chests,
since they can make the baby sneeze and give it wind. -- Mike Harding,
"The Armchair Anarchist's Almanac"
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Lingerie érotique

[Innucom]

Lingerie érotique

Produits de qualité.

Distribution partout au Québec

Demandez notre catalogue au format PDF

Gros/détail

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

 

 

debian-devel@lists.debian.org

 

Re: Attempts at security (was Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature)

[Hendrik Sattler]

Am Freitag 02 Februar 2007 13:49 schrieb Russell Coker:
> One of the enemies of security in Debian is the fact that every person
> controls their little area and has no requirement to work towards common
> goals (apart from the most obvious ones of making the system work).
>
> This means that instead of having a little cooperation from other
> developers anyone who wants to get a significant change included will have
> to fight hundreds of battles.
>
> SE Linux is a classic example of this.  Debian could have had SE Linux
> support long before Fedora, but instead it gets it long afterwards.
>
> The same battles occur with regard to all the other security measures I
> mentioned (and some others I didn't).  We could made Debian the most secure
> Linux distribution, there are many people who have the skills and the
> interest in doing so.

And everybody gets the SE Linux overhead if he wants or not? The current 
system does not give you perfect security but neither does adding SE Linux. 
Instead, you probably get annoying permission problems.
Name a few guys that really likes to use this on a private machine and some 
real-life improvements that it brings. Hint: "increased security" is not an 
argument.
Not being able to change the cause to the better doesn't mean to introduce a 
mess to control the result.
And I really hope that Debian never considers installing+enabling selinux by 
default.

> You want features such as exec-shield, well you don't get them - because of
> other people with the same attitude as you.

Please differ between things that are pretty much automatic (even when not 
only using debian packages) and things that you need some days to setup 
correctly (if you ever manage to do so).
And always think about the problems that you introduce with such things (and 
almost all you named have such).

HS


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Bug#409341: ITP: hgview -- Graphical viewer for distributed version content managment tools

[Steve Greenland]

On 02-Feb-07, 01:08 (CST), Vincent Danjean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Vincent Danjean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> * Package name: hgview
>   Version : not yet released
>   Upstream Author : Ludovic Aubry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * URL : http://www.logilab.org/hg/hgview

That redirects to the changelog, which is not actually very useful for
someone trying to find info about the package. Google doesn't find
anything more useful, though.

> * License : Not yet fixed. Probably GPL. I'm taking with upstream
>   Programming Lang: Python + gtk
>   Description : Graphical viewer for distributed SCM tools
> 
>  Distributed Source Control Managment tools such as git/cogito or
>  mercurial deals with large graphs of changesets. This tool allows to
>  display them graphicaly. 

1. That's "graphically".

2. Does hgview really support anything besides mercurial? A quick glance
at hgview.py implies otherwise.

3. In anycase, explicitly list the supported DSCM systems. "Tools such
as" doesn't help the user.

Steve

-- 
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world.   -- seen on the net


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: For Those Who Care About: Switzerland/Liechtenstein

[martin f krafft]

also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.02.02.0802 +0100]:
> Dear fellow developers:

I apologise for sending this to the wrong mailing list; it should
have gone to -project, as several have pointed out. And it should
have stayed on topic and serious, as this is not my blog.

I won't go into reasons because noone cares. Just know that I really
feel crap about abusing -devel-announce, and that this was purely my
fault, the other debian.ch are innocent.

Humbly,

-- 
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :'  :  proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
bush/cheney '04: the last vote you'll ever have to cast.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)

Re: Attempts at security

[Reinhard Tartler]

Hendrik Sattler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> And everybody gets the SE Linux overhead if he wants or not? 
Which overhead does SE Linux impose to you?

> The current system does not give you perfect security but neither does
> adding SE Linux. Instead, you probably get annoying permission
> problems.
> Name a few guys that really likes to use this on a private machine and some 
> real-life improvements that it brings. Hint: "increased security" is not an 
> argument.

I consider "increased security" a very valid argument. The DAC security
model is quite outdated now and doesn't really match real world security
concerns most workstations are experiencing today!

> Not being able to change the cause to the better doesn't mean to
> introduce a mess to control the result.  And I really hope that Debian
> never considers installing+enabling selinux by default.

IIRC, debian/etch already does already install selinux today without you
even noticing it.

> And always think about the problems that you introduce with such things (and 
> almost all you named have such).

I can assure you that the Debian SELinux gurus do.

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#409405: ITP: quadkonsole -- QuadKonsole embeds Konsole kparts in a grid layout.

[Johannes Ranke]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Johannes Ranke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


* Package name: quadkonsole
  Version : x.y.z
  Upstream Author : Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* URL : http://www.example.org/
* License : (GPL, LGPL, BSD, MIT/X, etc.)
  Programming Lang: (C, C++, C#, Perl, Python, etc.)
  Description : QuadKonsole embeds Konsole kparts in a grid layout.

 Compared to starting several konsole instances next to each other 
 quadkonsole has the following advantages (according to the package
 author):
  * Saves memory.
  * Faster startup.
  * You don't need to align your konsole windows by hand.
  * You have a lot more screen real estate.
  * Navigation is easier, using arrow keys.
  * All konsoles can be minimized/maximized at once.
  * QuadKonsole occupies only one slot in the taskbar.
 Some drawbacks (noted by the packager) are:
  * Session management is not possible.
  * Execution of commands on startup is not possible.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18-stiller1
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#409426: general: Direct rendering of graphics cards disappears

[Rafael Belmonte Muoz]

Subject: general: Direct rendering of graphics cards
Package: general
Severity: normal

*** Please type your report below this line ***


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 4.0
 APT prefers testing
 APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell:  /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.19.2
Locale: LANG=es_ES.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=es_ES.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)

When I log out of X sesion and, after, login a new X sesion, direct 
rendering of my Graphics Acelerator Card result

disabled.
My Graphics Acelerator Card is ATI Radeon 9250.
This problem is present using fglrx ATI propietary driver, or also using 
"radeon" or "ati" xorg 7.1 free driver.

This problen is also present in Ubuntu and Kubuntu Linux.

_
Descarga gratis la Barra de Herramientas de MSN 
http://www.msn.es/usuario/busqueda/barra?XAPID=2031&DI=1055&SU=http%3A//www.hotmail.com&HL=LINKTAG1OPENINGTEXT_MSNBH




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed: Re: Bug#409426: general: Direct rendering of graphics cards disappears

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

> reassign 409426 xserver-xorg
Bug#409426: general: Direct rendering of graphics cards disappears
Bug reassigned from package `general' to `xserver-xorg'.

> thank you
Stopping processing here.

Please contact me if you need assistance.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#409426: general: Direct rendering of graphics cards disappears

[Brice Goglin]

reassign 409426 xserver-xorg
thank you


Hi Rafael,

I am reassigning this bug to xserver-xorg for now.

> When I log out of X sesion and, after, login a new X sesion, direct
> rendering of my Graphics Acelerator Card result
> disabled. My Graphics Acelerator Card is ATI Radeon 9250.

Radeon 9250 AGP with PCI ids 1002:5960 is supposed to work.

> This problem is present using fglrx ATI propietary driver, or also
> using "radeon" or "ati" xorg 7.1 free driver.

Could you send us your Xorg.0.log after starting the new X session (the
one with DRI disabled) ? If possible, do this with a free (ati/radeon)
driver (not fglrx) on a Debian.

Brice



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Returned mail: Data format error

[barbara eubank]

Thank you for contacting Dancing bones Ink Inc. Your email will be answered 
shortly. If you would like to phone please call 406-212-2164.  visit: 
http://dancingbonesinkinc.home.bresnan.net   Thank you again Barbara   


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Attempts at security (was Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature)

[Russell Coker]

On Saturday 03 February 2007 05:17, Hendrik Sattler 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And everybody gets the SE Linux overhead if he wants or not?

It's disabled by default, unlike in Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux where 
it's on by default.  I believe that the latest release of SUSE has AppArmor 
on by default.

> The current 
> system does not give you perfect security but neither does adding SE Linux.
> Instead, you probably get annoying permission problems.

This is why every Windows user uses the administrator account for everything.

> Name a few guys that really likes to use this on a private machine and some
> real-life improvements that it brings. Hint: "increased security" is not an
> argument.

SE Linux is enabled by default in Fedora.  I believe that the majority of 
Fedora users don't even know it's there.  Their machine just works and tends 
not to get cracked.

> > You want features such as exec-shield, well you don't get them - because
> > of other people with the same attitude as you.
>
> Please differ between things that are pretty much automatic (even when not
> only using debian packages) and things that you need some days to setup
> correctly (if you ever manage to do so).
> And always think about the problems that you introduce with such things
> (and almost all you named have such).

You claim that almost all the examples I gave have problems.  Please explain 
the problems that you believe to be in exec-shield, PIE, and 
poly-instantiated directories.  Make sure that they are real examples not "a 
program might have some problem" claims.

-- 
[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]

Re: Attempts at security (was Re: Draft spec for new dpkg "triggers" feature)

[Marco d'Itri]

On Feb 02, Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> One of the enemies of security in Debian is the fact that every person 
> controls their little area and has no requirement to work towards common 
> goals (apart from the most obvious ones of making the system work).
Things used to be different, before somebody spread the meme that policy
must reflect usage and packages do not really need to follow it anyway.
Does anybody else remember these times?

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: For Those Who Care About: Switzerland/Liechtenstein

[Adrian von Bidder]

On Friday 02 February 2007 09:33, Sam Hocevar wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007, martin f krafft wrote:
> > PS: Almost all... as first official act, I herewith announce the
> > nomination of Mark J. Ray as an honorary member of debian.ch.
> > Honorary members have no rights and no obligations, but they also
> > cannot quit.
>
>Is that legal?

No it's not.  It's what we technically call a Joke.  Debian could use more 
of them.  (And yes, I do invite people to make jokes on my expense when the 
occasion arises.)

EOT here, I hope.  Do the flaming to my private email address, or to the 
debian.ch email address.

-- vbi


-- 
Anyone can invent a security system that he himself cannot break.
-- Schneier's Law


pgpbunb1SSjQX.pgp
Description: PGP signature