, creating and editing unknown or dynamic JSON
in Go
Gabs is a small utility for dealing with dynamic or unknown JSON
structures in golang. It's pretty much just a helpful wrapper around the
golang json.Marshal/json.Unmarshal behaviour and map[string]interface{}
objects. It does no
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Ritesh Raj Sarraf
* Package name: libnss-unknown
Version : 0.0.1
Upstream Author : Sjoerd Simons
* URL : https://gitlab.collabora.com/sjoerd/libnss-unknown
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: C
Description : nss
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : make Moo-based object constructors blow up on unknown
attributes
Simply loading MooX::StrictConstructor makes your constructors
"strict". If your constructor is called with an attribute init
argument that
Ludovico Cavedon wrote:
[...]
> I could have ntopng include a ntop transitional package, but:
> - ntop has version 3:5.0.1, ntopng 1.2.1. I would need to bump the ntopng
> version to 4, and I am not very excited by that
[...]
Hello,
you would not need to change the version (epoch) of the ntopng
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 635756 general
Bug #635756 [unknown] unknown: Improved useability for ExpressCard to
CompactFlash adaptors
Warning: Unknown package 'unknown'
Bug reassigned from package 'unknown' to 'general'.
> than
Package: wnpp
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Popcon shows some usage. No longer use it myself.
Joost
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://l
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Christoph Egger
* Package name: unknown-horizons
Version : 2011.2
* URL : http://www.unknown-horizons.org/
* License : GPLv3
Programming Lang: Python
Description : 2D realtime strategy simulation
Unknown Horizons
/MouseX-StrictConstructor/
* License : Artistic or GPL-1+
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : Make your object constructors blow up on unknown
attributes
Simply loading this module makes your constructors "strict". If your
constructor is called with an attribute argument
r/
* License : GPL, Artistic
Programming Lang: Perl
Description : Makes Moose object constructors blow up on unknown
attributes
Using this class to load Moose instead of just loading using
Moose itself makes your constructors "strict". If your constructor
is called with an a
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 10:23:51 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Except it will only work if the package uses 'Package-Type' and not
> 'X*-Package-Type'.
X*B*-Package-Type should work as well.
regards,
guillem
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
On Thu, 07 Feb 2008, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > If nobody has any objections, i'll follow Frans' advice and file a bug
> > against dpkg-dev.
>
> Yes, makes sense. I've just fixed it in dpkg's git [0].
Except it will only work if the package uses 'Package-Type' and not
'X*-Package-Type'. We should m
On Thursday 07 February 2008, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > I raised this issue on #debian-boot (irc), and was told that the
> > concerns by "(a d-i maintainer | someone who was willing to express an
> > opinion" were correct. Frans Pop from the debian-installer team
> > verified that the Homepage field
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:23:37 +0100, Jonas Meurer wrote:
> On 06/02/2008 Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > I'm not sure whether this is an issue with dpkg or rather with lintian,
> > > but if I check the cryptsetup deb+udeb packages after building them,
> > > lintian reports that udebs don't allow th
On 06/02/2008 Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I'm not sure whether this is an issue with dpkg or rather with lintian,
> > but if I check the cryptsetup deb+udeb packages after building them,
> > lintian reports that udebs don't allow the Homepage field in
> > debian/control.
>
> This is what I was told by
Jonas Meurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not sure whether this is an issue with dpkg or rather with lintian,
> but if I check the cryptsetup deb+udeb packages after building them,
> lintian reports that udebs don't allow the Homepage field in
> debian/control.
This is what I was told by (a
On 06/02/2008 Leo costela Antunes wrote:
> Jonas Meurer wrote:
> > I: cryptsetup-udeb udeb: unknown-field-in-control homepage
>
> Quick guess: could this be a case-sensitivity issue? Should be
> "Homepage:"...
Unfortunately not. It's already 'Homepage'
On 06/02/2008 Barry deFreese wrote:
>> I: cryptsetup-udeb udeb: unknown-field-in-control homepage
>
> What version of lintian do you have? That should be fixed by now.
$ lintian -V
Lintian v1.23.43
greetings,
jonas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Jonas Meurer wrote:
> I: cryptsetup-udeb udeb: unknown-field-in-control homepage
Quick guess: could this be a case-sensitivity issue? Should be
"Homepage:"...
Cheers
--
Leo "costela" Antunes
[insert a witty retort here]
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
belongs to the Source section of
debian/control, so I see no way to keep it out of the udeb.
Here's the exact lintian message:
$ lintian -i -I cryptsetup_1.0.6~pre1+svn45-2_amd64.changes
I: cryptsetup-udeb udeb: unknown-field-in-control homepage
N:
N: See the Policy Manual for a list of the
section of
debian/control, so I see no way to keep it out of the udeb.
Here's the exact lintian message:
$ lintian -i -I cryptsetup_1.0.6~pre1+svn45-2_amd64.changes
I: cryptsetup-udeb udeb: unknown-field-in-control homepage
N:
N: See the Policy Manual for a list of the possible field
he GNU binary utilities, for the z80-unknown-coff target
The programs in this package are used to assemble, link and manipulate
binary and object files for the Z80 and R800 CPUs. This
package is primarily for Z80 and R800 developers and is not
needed by normal users or developers.
-- System Infor
Hi,
the weekly send reports about release critical bugs to
debian-devel-announce have the Content-Type “unknown-8bit” set. Why this?
What is unknown for the encoding of the reports?
And why is the sender of the reports not a valid address?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(generated from [EMAIL
I'm currently implementing open-iscsi support in initramfs (which uses
busybox and klibc) and rewriting the initramfs-tools to support more
complex rootfs setups (iscsi > dm > ocfs2). Now when I try to use
"iscsiadm" I get the following error:
"iscsid: peeruser_unix: u
also sprach GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.05.02.0610 +0200]:
> I agreed to Dickopp (you read the standard in detail). This is the
> implementation dependent behavior.
I never proposed to change the standard. I proposed to make use of
implementation-dependent freedom to implement timezon
mezone related functions does not return any error value.
> If you ask me, it should do either of the following, in decreasing
> order of my preference:
>
> cirrus:~> TZ=GOTO date
> W: unknown timezone: GOTO. Using UTC instead.
> Sat Apr 16 12:48:31 UTC 2005
>
>
martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> also sprach Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1552 +0200]:
>> Therefore, any actual behavior (including the existing one as well
>> as the suggested alternatives) would be standard conforming.
>
> I don't think I was criticising standards
also sprach Martin Dickopp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.04.16.1552 +0200]:
> Therefore, any actual behavior (including the existing one as well
> as the suggested alternatives) would be standard conforming.
I don't think I was criticising standards compliance...
> >From a QoI point of view, I'd pref
quest, it should *not* fall
> back to GMT and claim that it is rendering the requested timezone.
>
> cirrus:~> TZ=GOTO date
> Sat Apr 16 12:48:31 GOTO 2005
>
> is wrong. It is not 12:48 in the GOTO timezone because the GOTO
> timezone does not exist.
>
> If you ask m
at Apr 16 12:48:31 GOTO 2005
is wrong. It is not 12:48 in the GOTO timezone because the GOTO
timezone does not exist.
If you ask me, it should do either of the following, in decreasing
order of my preference:
cirrus:~> TZ=GOTO date
W: unknown timezone: GOTO. Using UTC instead.
Sat Apr 1
**
**
WARNING: WinProxy has detected a virus in file
attached to this e-mail message!
The attachment has been automatically removed to
protect your network.
WinProxy Administrator: [EMAIL
: a practical manual describing the cool and unknown features
in Debian
I intent to package this manual, it is unfortunately written
in portuguese only yet... I'm translating it to english but
don't have enough time and knowledge to do this... if someone
wants to finish it, it is an inter
8.09.2000 pisze Branden Robinson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > I am now very turned off because instead of seeing a bunch of
> > bright developers, I'm seeing a voluminous amount of off-topic
> > flaming.
> Welcome to Debian.
``What is Debian. How do you define Debian? If you're talking about what
On Sep 07, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Some very big ISP here have mailservers with no reverse mapping...
>Well, they are badly broken, you know?
I do, but refusing mail is quite an extreme act.
>The IANA mandate is that /all/ machines on public IP address have
I really don't thin
>>"Micheal" == Michael S Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Micheal> I just joined the debian-devel list yesterday, all excited about being
Micheal> able to possibly contribute code and insights to the installation
Micheal> system to make it more palatable to those who would like to install
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:20:02PM -0700, Michael S. Fischer wrote:
> I just joined the debian-devel list yesterday, all excited
[...]
> I am now very turned off because instead of seeing a bunch
> of bright developers, I'm seeing a voluminous amount of off-topic
> flaming.
Welcome to Debian.
--
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 06:20:46PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> So? Anyone who asked for that would be unreasonable. Besides, nobody's mail
> server is telneting to your port 25 to see what your SMTP greeting says --
> that would be insane. It's a simple double-lookup. The PTR record is
> quer
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:16:23PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:37:25PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > > My reverse DNS does not match my forward DNS. I have @home. Only
> >
> > They don't need to "match". Your IP just needs to resolve to something, and
> > that some
On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 11:10:12AM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:00:39PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:44:06PM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
[snip, snip, snippety-snip]
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I just joined the debian-devel list yester
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:00:39PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:44:06PM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> > A server on the 'net without matching forward/reverse DNS is broken.
> > Period.
>
> Complete bullshit. Show me the RFC that says you may only have one
> DNS
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:44:06PM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> A server on the 'net without matching forward/reverse DNS is broken.
>> Period.
>
>Complete bullshit. Show me the RFC that says you may only have on
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:16:23PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:37:25PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > > My reverse DNS does not match my forward DNS. I have @home. Only
> >
> > They don't need to "match". Your IP just needs to resolve to something, and
> > that some
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:37:25PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > My reverse DNS does not match my forward DNS. I have @home. Only
>
> They don't need to "match". Your IP just needs to resolve to something, and
> that something needs to resolve back to your IP. This has no effect on what
> Fro
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:00:39PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Complete bullshit. Show me the RFC that says you may only have one DNS
> name attached to an IP at a time. You can't do it because it doesn't
> exist. Several Debian developers have debian.net subdomains which do not
> reverse beca
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:44:06PM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> >> yes. get an ISP that can do reverse DNS. YEESHHH! I'll happily bounce
> >> their mail until then.
> >
> >Are you willing to pay the difference between the cost of that user's
> >current ISP and one which meets your stan
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 04:33:09PM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> My reverse DNS does not match my forward DNS. I have @home. Only
They don't need to "match". Your IP just needs to resolve to something, and
that something needs to resolve back to your IP. This has no effect on what
From: addres
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:41:30PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Perhaps it's from being too geeky myself, but Branden's explanation
> > (the recipient of the error message is not welcome on *THEIR* Internet
> > under the reasoning that they're ... refusing connections from machines
>
> It was t
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:37:55PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> yes. get an ISP that can do reverse DNS. YEESHHH! I'll happily bounce
>> their mail until then.
>
>Are you willing to pay the difference between the co
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 03:19:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> People like Mr. Jones don't like to consider impacts. They like easy rules
> and easy policies. They don't like to do analysis. And they especially
> don't like to be inconvenienced by considerations of the impact of their
> act
On Thu 07 Sep 2000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 11:58:33AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > > In any case, reverse DNS lookup is reasonable, no matter what you
> > > think of DUL.
> >
> > I have to agree with this. The previous time, the discussion was using
> > DUL to block emai
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:33:21PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > It says, in plain English, "failed to find host name from IP address".
> It says in plain English, "administrative prohibition (failed to fine
> host name from IP address)"
> Perhaps it's from being too geeky myself, but Branden's
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 11:58:33AM +0200, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > In any case, reverse DNS lookup is reasonable, no matter what you
> > think of DUL.
>
> I have to agree with this. The previous time, the discussion was using
> DUL to block email. This is about reverse DNS lookups failing, which
>
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:33:21PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 07, Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >This is just your standard lack of reverse DNS.. Part of the anti-spam
> >bit. The sender needs to get working reverse DNS I suppose..
> Looks like a stupid check, to me.
I
On Sep 07, Jason Gunthorpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This is just your standard lack of reverse DNS.. Part of the anti-spam
>bit. The sender needs to get working reverse DNS I suppose..
Looks like a stupid check, to me.
Some very big ISP here have mailservers with no reverse mapping...
--
ci
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 09:06:55PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> i think you misread what i said. i said that missing or incorrect
> reverse DNS is *NOT* a good reason for bouncing mail.
I guess I did.
Thanks,
--
Raul
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscri
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 05:48:17AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 06:09:31PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > it's simple - if you want a service that's worth having, you
> > pay whatever it costs. if you don't want that, then pay for a
> > cheap/crappy service and put up with i
find 193.203.225.10: Non-existent host/domain
It used to be a different scenario:
mail.deanmoor.nl -> 193.203.225.35 -> www.deanmoor.nl ->
193.203.225.10 -> unknown
I contacted them about this (a couple of times), but they were convi
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 06:09:31PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote:
> nobody's telling anyone to get any particular ISP or that they have to
> pay for a premium quality service.
True.
> it's simple - if you want a service that's worth having, you pay
> whatever it costs. if you don't want that, then p
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:55:07AM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:37:55PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > yes. get an ISP that can do reverse DNS. YEESHHH! I'll happily bounce
> > their mail until then.
>
> Are you willing to pay the difference between the cost of
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:57:05PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:33:21PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > Perhaps it's from being too geeky myself, but Branden's explanation
> > (the recipient of the error message is not welcome on *THEIR* Internet
> > under the reasoning t
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 12:55:07AM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:37:55PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > yes. get an ISP that can do reverse DNS. YEESHHH! I'll happily
> > bounce their mail until then.
>
> Are you willing to pay the difference between the cost of th
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:57:05PM -0400, Adam McKenna wrote:
> > Perhaps it's from being too geeky myself, but Branden's explanation
> > (the recipient of the error message is not welcome on *THEIR* Internet
> > under the reasoning that they're ... refusing connections from machines
> > with ch
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:37:55PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> yes. get an ISP that can do reverse DNS. YEESHHH! I'll happily bounce
> their mail until then.
Are you willing to pay the difference between the cost of that user's
current ISP and one which meets your standard? Until then, y
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:33:21PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Perhaps it's from being too geeky myself, but Branden's explanation
> (the recipient of the error message is not welcome on *THEIR* Internet
> under the reasoning that they're ... refusing connections from machines
> with characteris
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 11:33:21PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 09:58:49PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:08:17PM +1100, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > > > <<< 550 mail from :::216.250.196.10 rejected: administrative
> > > > prohibition (fail
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 09:58:49PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:08:17PM +1100, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > > <<< 550 mail from :::216.250.196.10 rejected: administrative
> > > prohibition (failed to find host name from IP address)
> > >
> > > Is there any way t
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 09:58:49PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:08:17PM +1100, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > <<< 550 mail from :::216.250.196.10 rejected: administrative
> > prohibition (failed to find host name from IP address)
> >
> > Is there any way to get this f
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 01:08:17PM +1100, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> <<< 550 mail from :::216.250.196.10 rejected: administrative prohibition
> (failed to find host name from IP address)
>
> Is there any way to get this fixed?
No. The MTA at the destination host is trying to tell you that dialu
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> Oliver Schulze is an upstream maintainer of one of my prospective packages,
> and he's had problems sending mail to my @debian.org address. I believe that
> this is something to do with master's IPv6 configuration - the SMTP error
> message from master i
red-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:22:33 -0400
From: "Oliver Schulze L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16 i586)
X-Accept-Language: en, es-PY, es
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Fwd: Returned mail: Use
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 11:28:42AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> I hope you mean you code would like like:
>
> if [ "$1" = "configure" ]; then
> do_configure
> fi
>
> the double '==' is a bash-ism not supported by POSIX shell.
>
at the moment i don't even check for $1, i completely ig
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Lawrence Walton wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 07:00:04PM -0400, Sergey V Kovalyov wrote:
> > After today's potato update my computer no longer knows about localhost.
> > Is this a known bug in some package or do I just need to reconfigure
> > something ?
> > Anyone else ha
After today's potato update my computer no longer knows about localhost.
Is this a known bug in some package or do I just need to reconfigure
something ?
Anyone else has similar problem ?
Sergey.
>>>>> "Adam" == Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> "warning: ignori
>>>>> "Ben" == Ben Gertzfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> "warning: ignoring unknown format `$$format_data{'format'}'" if
Joey> $ENV{DOC_BA
>>>>> "Joey" == Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joey> "warning: ignoring unknown format `$$format_data{'format'}'"
Joey> if $ENV{DOC_BASE_GRIPE}; }
This is a nice solution.
--
Brought to you by the letters G and
> "Adam" == Adam Di Carlo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Adam> Geeze -- ok, I'll fix it tonight.
Thanks! I didn't mean to sound concilatory, but it seems a lot of
packages have a lot of doc-base warnings these days..
--
Brought to you by the letters N and P and the number 19.
"You should b
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>I've been noticing that, even though we're all encouraged to use
>doc-base nowadays, that doc-base emits noxious and obnoxious warnings
>whenever it sees a format it doesn't recognize.
>
>I've just adapted libgtk1.2-doc to use doc-base, and on EVERY instal
Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> Is there any way we can make the default for doc-base to *not* warn on
> these unknown formats? Frankly, it's just ugly as all get-out. :)
--- /usr/sbin/install-docs Sat Jan 2 01:48:28 1999
+++ ./install-docs Wed May 12 15:27:12 1999
@@ -6
ing up libgtk1.2-doc (1.2.3-1) ...
warning: ignoring unknown format `texinfo' at /usr/sbin/install-docs line 627,
chunk 10.
warning: ignoring unknown format `info' at /usr/sbin/install-docs line 627,
chunk 13.
warning: ignoring unknown format `texinfo' at /usr/sbin/install
> >
> >- Transcript of session follows -
> > 550 ac.netg.se... User unknown
> >
> > Hi Andres,
> >
> > Found a little typo in the description.
> >
> > PACKAGE: bison
> > MAINTAINER: Anders Chrigstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Package: nvi
Version: 1.34
Revision: 7
Maintainer: Ian Murdock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
$ TERM=xterm-pcolor nvi
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
This shouldn' happen even with termcap based programs
-- Siggy (the middle S.)
81 matches
Mail list logo
