Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Sunday 19 February, 2006 � 09:43:00AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
> >
> > Well, even though there is probably a bug, I don't think that this one
> > is enough to request for the *removal* of the module.
> >
> > You probably have other exampl
On Sunday 19 February, 2006 � 09:43:00AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote:
>
> Well, even though there is probably a bug, I don't think that this one
> is enough to request for the *removal* of the module.
>
> You probably have other examples, so please mention them.
>
> Please also answer to the
> > Quoting juan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > > Package: samba
> > > Version: 3.0.21a-1
> > > Severity: normal
> > >
> > > looking at the source code, it's clear the the parameters announced in
> > > the samba doc are pure fiction. (log level = 0 vfs:x).
> > > please remove extd_audit until it's fixe
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:34:48 +0100
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Bug#348421: samba: please remove broken vfs module: extd_audit
On Tuesday 17 January, 2006 � 06:58:20AM +0100, Chr
Quoting juan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Package: samba
> Version: 3.0.21a-1
> Severity: normal
>
> looking at the source code, it's clear the the parameters announced in
> the samba doc are pure fiction. (log level = 0 vfs:x).
> please remove extd_audit until it's fixed upstream, it's just dangerous
>
Package: samba
Version: 3.0.21a-1
Severity: normal
looking at the source code, it's clear the the parameters announced in
the samba doc are pure fiction. (log level = 0 vfs:x).
please remove extd_audit until it's fixed upstream, it's just dangerous
for a production server and confusing for the use
6 matches
Mail list logo
