Bug#1093596: chkrootkit autopkgtest failure when not running dhclient

2025-01-21 Thread R Lewis
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 09:04:53 +0100 Helmut Grohne wrote: >l > chkrootkit fails its autopkgtest when the containment environment is not > running dhclient. The ci.debian.net infrastructure is running dhclient > and there the test output looks like this: > > https://ci.debian.net/data/autopkgtest/uns

Bug#987017: release-notes: Giving many ways to do something *is* useful

2024-12-23 Thread R Lewis
On Sun, 28 Apr 2024 08:29:25 +0200 Paul Gevers wrote: > On 27-04-2024 11:48 p.m., Manny wrote: > > As an aptitude user, I was bothered by the lack of aptitude ways of > > doing things in the upgrade guide. > > I anything, I prefer the Release Notes to move to using one tool in the > instructions,

Bug#1041072: trixie: Explicitly flag that /usr-merge changes will break skip-upgrades

2024-12-23 Thread R Lewis
On Sat, 15 Jul 2023 12:34:31 +0100 Justin B Rye wrote: > Matthew Vernon wrote: > > We don't support skip-upgrades, but in practice they can often be made > > to work by an experienced administrator. > > > > For trixie, though, packages are going to be allowed to assume > > merged-/usr, and the ong

Bug#1076745: logcheck-database: cron rules

2024-11-10 Thread R Lewis
> ^(\w{3} [ :0-9]{11}|[0-9T:.+-]{32}) [._[:alnum:]-]+ CRON\[[0-9]+\]: > pam_[[:alnum:]]+\(cron:session\): session (opened|closed) for user > [[:alnum:]-]+(\(uid=[[:digit:]]+\))?( by \(uid=[0-9]+\))?$ > > Notice the "by" now has a username > > The fix is pretty easy, add an optional second usernam

Bug#491127: logcheck: please consider an option which will always check the entire log file

2024-05-12 Thread R Lewis
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:15:51 +0200 Marc Haber wrote: > It would help with debugging to have an option that causes logcheck to > always look through the entire log file, ie not using logtail. Looking at this old bug from 2008: does the -t option meet this need?

Bug#982998: chkrootkit chkproc uses incorrect value for max_pid

2021-12-15 Thread R Lewis
On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 15:38:15 +0100 (CET) "Timo Sigurdsson" < public_tim...@silentcreek.de> wrote: > I've encountered this bug on several machines after upgrading to the latest stable release (bullseye). Could you please backport this fix to bullseye so it can be fixed in a point release? Thank you

Bug#999418: chkrootkit: chkproc bogus OooPS, not expected 210672 value

2021-11-25 Thread R Lewis
On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 18:53:38 + "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" < li...@treblig.org> wrote: > Package: chkrootkit > Version: 0.55-1+b1 > Severity: important > > Dear Maintainer, > Since upgrade to bullseye I'm seeing chkrootkit warnings of the > form: > > OooPS, not expected 210672 value > > I think

Bug#630880: this bug is fixed in salsa

2021-10-09 Thread R Lewis
For anyone watching this bug, i believe it is closed by the enhanced diff mode (merged in salsa (thanks Marcos!), and pending an upload): Once the version in salsa is uploaded if If you add DIFF_MODE="true" to /etc/chkrootkit.conf then the cron job will filter the output to give you stable outpu

Bug#994153: This bug is pending

2021-10-09 Thread R Lewis
Thanks to Marcos a fix is merged in salsa

Bug#981446: offering to help

2021-09-23 Thread R Lewis
Hi - longtime logcheck user here (since 2004 at least). Very keen to keep logcheck in the distribution and looking to get involved in Debian (spare time only). happy to submit patches etc but how should that be done - to the bts or via salsa? will anyone review and merge things? Is there an ema