On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> There are good reasons to want to have the agent running over time and
> not terminating with the individual invocations of gpg1. In particular,
> passphrase caching and smartcard management are useful features.
I noticed after upgrad
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 12:41:18PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On desktop systems (where i'd expect the majority of secret key access
> happens), for folks who are running systemd, i recommend enabling the
> systemd user services, as documented in
> /usr/share/doc/{gnupg-agent,dirmngr}/READ
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 12:41:18PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> On desktop systems (where i'd expect the majority of secret key access
> happens), for folks who are running systemd, i recommend enabling the
> systemd user services, as documented in
> /usr/share/doc/{gnupg-agent,dirmngr}/READ
Ian Jackson writes:
> Johannes Schauer writes ("Beware of leftover gpg-agent processes (was: Re:
> Changes for GnuPG in debian)"):
>
>> Quoting Daniel Kahn Gillmor (2016-08-04 18:29:03)
>> > One of the main differences is that all access to your secret key
>> > will be handled through gpg-agent,
On 08/05/2016 06:08 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Could we not have gpg2 not only automatically launch the agent, but
> also automatically terminate it. This would provide the same UI and
> same persistence properties as gpg1.
Full ACK here, with the slight modification that the agent should
only comm
Hi,
Wendy Lin:
> Given ORACLEs very aggressive stance and intentional destruction of
> opensource communities like opensolaris.org it must be *CLEARLY* ruled
> out that there is *ANY* risk for Debian.
Wrong. You cannot rule out ANY risk, and the current legal landscape is
not compatible with CLEA
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Santiago Vila wrote:
> > This is to warn interested parties that now that install-info is
> > GNU install-info, the probability of a package shipping a file named
> > /usr/share/info/dir.gz by mistake is now much higher than before
Hi,
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Santiago Vila wrote:
> This is to warn interested parties that now that install-info is
> GNU install-info, the probability of a package shipping a file named
> /usr/share/info/dir.gz by mistake is now much higher than before.
Note that lintian catches that:
http://lintia
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 02:00:42AM -0500, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:54:05PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > > Software has bugs, it's a fact of life. New software is more likely to
> > > have unknown bugs that affect more people. What makes the Helix packages
> > > so nice is
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 12:29:32AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> I believe the infamous "aalib" affair actualy came out of a wishlist
> bugreport submitted to them by a user; the then frozen potato aalib was too
> low a version to meet all the helix dependencies. This meant people like me
> had to
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 11:54:05PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Software has bugs, it's a fact of life. New software is more likely to
> > have unknown bugs that affect more people. What makes the Helix packages
> > so nice is the turnaround time for fixes. I don't know how they do it,
> > but th
Joseph Carter wrote:
> Software has bugs, it's a fact of life. New software is more likely to
> have unknown bugs that affect more people. What makes the Helix packages
> so nice is the turnaround time for fixes. I don't know how they do it,
> but they do.
Maybe they have a dinstall delay of le
On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 04:06:49PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> > packages into unstable. Helix is too stable for unstable, and too unstable
> > for stable.
>
> Not exactly true, as Helix Gnome is usually more cutting-edge than
> unstable Gnome.
In my experience, it's had a bug report to fix tur
On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 12:29:32AM +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote:
> packages into unstable. Helix is too stable for unstable, and too unstable
> for stable.
Not exactly true, as Helix Gnome is usually more cutting-edge than unstable
Gnome.
--
David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http/ftp: dvdeug.dhi
G'day Joey,
I'm not subscribed to debian-devel, but wanted to add some comments on this
issue after reading the web archives. Because I'm not subscribed, I dunno if
my Cc to the list will work, in which case you can forward this to the list
as you see fit.
IMHO, the entire reason Helix exists as
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Peter Teichman wrote:
> I have one question. What is the preferred way for me to handle our
> gtk package? This is a library package that we actually apply some
> patches to for a slightly nicer user interface.
Well, we don't have much provision for flavors of shared librari
"JG" == John Goerzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
>>
>> Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG> Whoa! What packages understand this, and where is it documented?
Sorry this is a error.
The right place for this is in:
/usr/share/bug/$package/cont
Christian Marillat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
>
> Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whoa! What packages understand this, and where is it documented?
>
> Christian
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsub
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:20:48AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 3) Libraries - All possible effort should be made to make Debian the
> primary source of libraries. Period full stop. This is so important
> because of what we are seeing with helix and their special library
> pack
Previously Christian Marillat wrote:
> Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
> Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Where did that come from That won't do anything at all and will make
dpkg-gencontrol complain loudly at you.
Wichert.
--
_
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 03:50:08PM +0200, Christian Marillat wrote:
> "PT" == Peter Teichman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> PT> This solution looks like the best one. I'll start rebuilding our
> PT> packages immediately.
>
> Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
>
>
"PT" == Peter Teichman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
PT> This solution looks like the best one. I'll start rebuilding our
PT> packages immediately.
Don't forget to put this field in debian/control:
Send-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christian
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:20:48AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> > > That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
> > > Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
> >
> > Please see elsewhere in this thread for
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:02:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > No, there is no difference between our apps and the upstream in most
> > cases. We do brand gnome-core and gdm, but those are the only packages
> > I can think of offhand. Those are only graphics changes, substituting
> > some of
Le Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 03:07:03PM -0500, Joseph Carter écrivait:
> Perhaps the existing Gnome maintainers interested could help by working on
> the packages in CVS? This takes some load off of Peter who is currently
> trying to do the whole Debianization process as well as upstream work
> himself
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
> > Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
>
> Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other remarks on this subject.
>
> An Origin field is a great idea.
We ha
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 01:28:18AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:12:56PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote:
> > stable Debian releases only have security changes and critical bugfixes
> > going
> > into them once released. I feel that the security/bugfix is more important
> >
On Wed, Aug 30, 2000 at 04:48:19PM +1100, Anand Kumria wrote:
> That is one mechanism of creating a private namespace, isn't another
> Setting the origin to something other than Debian?
Please see elsewhere in this thread for my other remarks on this subject.
An Origin field is a great idea.
On
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:12:56PM -0700, Ryan Murray wrote:
> stable Debian releases only have security changes and critical bugfixes going
> into them once released. I feel that the security/bugfix is more important
> than any of the "extras" offered in the Stormix packages, so your suggestion
>
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:02:04PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > No, there is no difference between our apps and the upstream in most
> > cases. We do brand gnome-core and gdm, but those are the only packages
> > I can think of offhand. Those are only graphics changes, substituting
> > some of
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:08:43PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Don't do this. If you're hellbent on forking Debian packages just for the
> sake of doing so, or spraying them with Helix musk, then name the packages
> appropriately.
>
> helix-gnomecc
> helix-gnome-core
> helix-gdm
In the case
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Raul Miller wrote:
> > I think this is so bad that every binary copy of grep 2.1-7 should be
> > deleted from every archive as soon as possible.
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You mean 2.1-6?
Oops. yes.
I'd hand-patched my system and hadn't noticed that
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> I think this is so bad that every binary copy of grep 2.1-7 should be
> deleted from every archive as soon as possible.
You mean 2.1-6?
--
Debian GNU/Linux 1.3 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home P
Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the broken grep (I think it is filed as a Bug already) will do a lot of
> damage to your system. It will kill your Windowmanger -list if you install a
> Windowmanager, and it will make the /etc/X11/config not work
> (user-xsession).
There are a bunch of
> The 0.93R6 sysvinit-2.57b used /var/log/initrunlevel as the file to
> communicate with init. The debian-1.0 version of sysvinit-2.57b
Interesting. I was just about to submit a report about how if I did a
shutdown -h now, it halted the system, and then if I hit ctl-alt-del I
got a message about
You (Chris Fearnley) wrote:
> 'Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:'
> >I've changed the postinst script to create a symbolic link in /var/log,
> >so that it will (hopefully) work in all cases. It is also backwards
> >compatible with other programs (UPS watchdogs etc) this way.
>
> You might consider put
'Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:'
>I've changed the postinst script to create a symbolic link in /var/log,
>so that it will (hopefully) work in all cases. It is also backwards
>compatible with other programs (UPS watchdogs etc) this way.
>
>If I don't get any replies saying "this is a bad idea" I'll
I hate to reply to my own messages, but..
You (Miquel van Smoorenburg) wrote:
> The 0.93R6 sysvinit-2.57b used /var/log/initrunlevel as the file to
> communicate with init. The debian-1.0 version of sysvinit-2.57b
> changed this to /etc/initrunlvl (as the default was in the original source).
I've
You (Helmut Geyer) wrote:
> Hi!
>
> There is a small problem with the new sysvinit (2.58-1) suite. Once you have
> installed it, you can't shutdown/reboot/halt the system as these use a
> different way of communicating than the 2.57* init (a FIFO, no longer a file).
> So please make copies of the
Something similar happened last time I upgraded init -- to Bruce's ELF
version.
Shouldn't packages doing stuff like that do some postinst _after_ rebooting
the machine? They could just add an rc file that removes itself once it
executes.
Thanks,
Jeff
Helmut Geyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
40 matches
Mail list logo
