On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Jules Bean wrote:
> Faking mail is not something which should be undertaken trivially.
Well call it "fudging", if you will. ;)
> Making valid and useful actions impossible is not the way to fight
> spam. To fight spam, our spam-masters work quite hard to block open
> relays,
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 08:26:00AM -0500, Daniel Burrows was heard to say:
> > What gets me is that aptitude, apt-get, deselect, and gnome-apt all
> > seem to give slightly different info on which packages
> > are broken, will be deleted, or are on hold. Are the
> > dependancy rules interperted di
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 02:43:37PM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Jules Bean wrote:
>
> > Making valid and useful actions impossible is not the way to fight
> > spam. To fight spam, our spam-masters work quite hard to block open
> > relays, etc.
>
> Alright, I really don't care a
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 04:40:12PM +, Jules Bean wrote:
> The problem in fact turned out to be that the stuff in
> /etc/X11/Xsession which groks the /etc/X11/Xresources directory is
> relatively new,
^^
Time to break out the flashlights and the moving trains. This transition
occ
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:26:12PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> How is it right to spit out an error message on every connection that
> adds nothing to most people's use of the product? Especially when there
> exists a verbose mode for people who want lots of gory details about the
> efficacy of t
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:59:41AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> > If we drop perl-5.004, is there a good reason why we do need to rename
> > an essential package? (from perl-base to perl-5.005-base).
> >
> > I understand this was made to be able to ins
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 11:26:12PM -0500, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 03:13:36PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Michael Stone wrote:
> > > Not very backward-compatible, is it? In some environments it's desirable
> > > to have the software behave the same on every platform; even if i
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 03:53:13PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 11:59:41AM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > > If we drop perl-5.004, is there a good reason why we do need to rename
> > > an essential package? (from perl-base
I decided against removing the following packages because of unwelcome
consequences. This list does not include packages that were not removed
because they were fixed.
Package: emacs19 (debian/main).
Maintainer: Mark W. Eichin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
57636 gnus under emacs19 opens files in /tmp in
Richard Braakman wrote:
> I removed these packages from frozen today.
> Package: xexec (debian/contrib).
> Maintainer: Zed Pobre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [Also removed from unstable]
> 56762 xexec: GPLed software linked against non-compatible Qt2
According to this short description it needs to be
Just take my comments as a wish list for the future, I
know this stuff is still alpha grade (but still very
usefull). Nice thing about debian is that it not only
has a bullet resistant package manager (not bullet
proof as per some of the slink->potato upgrade horror
stories I've been reading), but
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 08:56:34AM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> Eh, well, it is correct[1] behavior to toss out an error message in this
> case since it's notifying you of a *security* problem. In fact, it's
> telling you that the server key is half as secure as the server claims
> it is.
But
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 09:18:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Use the Source, Luke. Quit whining and start coding.
Why? On hosts where this is an issue, f-secure's ssh does the job just
fine. (Not to mention that I don't live in a free country and can't work
on ssh...)
--
Mike Stone
pgp
In Wed, 8 Mar 2000 11:10:11 -0500, de profundis Michael Stone <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> cum veritas scribat
mstone> Are you really convinced that the security of a 1023 bit key is so much
mstone> worse than the security of a 1024 bit key that any amount of effort
mstone> necessary to transition to a ne
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 03:56:51PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Package: transproxy (debian/main).
> Maintainer: Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 56998 transproxy: daemon does not start
What needs to be done to get this back into frozen? I've still got a machine
running this. Or is there any
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> Isn't it that to decrypt 1024 key takes double the amount of
> CPU time than decrypting 1023 key, as long as there is no other
> method than brute-force method of trying every combination.
>
> IMO It is a serious security issue, when the system is half a
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 07:55:49AM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
>
> Can we please close the list from non-member submissions? This is not
> the first spam that's come over debian-devel recently.
Or set up that :
- reply to thread can be done from anyone
- new thread can be started by
a) member
b) non
I have noticed a conflict between the versions of Expat in apache-perl
1.3.9.10-1.21-6 and libxml-parser-perl 2.27-6 that causes memory
corruption. I assume that the DSO apache-1.3.9/libapache-mod-perl
1.21 in potato is similarly affected, as I first started getting
segfaults when running under th
Michael Stevens wrote:
> Package: emacs19
> Version: 19.34-21
>
> Hi.
> Unable to update to latest stable release -- typescript
> of failure attached.
>
> Script started on Wed Mar 8 11:43:42 2000
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[1m~[m# [Kaapt-get upgrade
> Reading Package Lists... 0%Reading Packa
On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 02:43:37PM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
> > One possible technique we could employ is to require that the list
> > address appear visibly in the headers (to: or cc:). This would
> > prevent Bcc'ing the lists which is a shame (and care would need to be
> > taken with -private, w
Hi,
I have a question concerning the meaning of "Beta", "stable" and
"frozen" and all that stuff. The current Potato tree contains the PHP4
Beta 3 Package. The woody tree contains the PHP4 Beta 4 PL1. Does that
mean, that Potato will stay on Beta 3? Or is there a chance that
Potato will contain th
On 08-Mar-2000 Jim Westveer wrote:
Anyone know how to get a message to Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ???
his package w3-el-e20 in slink, needs to be updated for 2.1r5.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .forwards to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- bad email addr
--
Jules Bean wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 10:45:07AM +0100, Nils Jeppe wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> >
> > > > Can we please close the list from non-member submissions?
> > >
> > > NO!
> > > I, like many users of Debian, post from different mail addresses. Lists
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 03:56:51PM +0100, Richard Braakman wrote:
>> Package: transproxy (debian/main).
>> Maintainer: Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> 56998 transproxy: daemon does not start
>
>What needs to be done to
On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 08:19:47AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> As I understand it, pdftotext is a new tool available in 5.5 but not 5.0.
AFAIK pdftotext is included in xpdf - it's not part of gs 5.5. The differences
between 5.10 and 5.50 are not that big and I do not want to risk a stable
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.6.9
Severity: wishlist
There have been two bug reports submitted this week (Bug#59321
against dictd and Bug#59321 against pipsecd) that were caused by
calling start-stop-daemon with -start immediately following a
start-stop-daemon call using -stop. Occasionally the d
Hi!
I've packed gnofract, a small gnome fractal generating program. I am not
a debian developer yet, so I'll need a sponsor to upload this package.
Futhermore, this is my first Debian package, so I'd appriciate it if
somebody would check whether the package is all right and whether I did
everythin
-
This ad is being sent in compliance with Senate bill 1618,
Title3, section 301.
http://www.senate.gov~murkowski/commercialemail/S771index.html
Further transmitions to you by the sender of this email may be
stopped at no cost to yo
On Wed, 8 March 2000 15:28:37 -0500, Joe Block wrote:
> So sign on with multiple addresses and set all but one nomail. It's
> ludicrous to subject everyone to spam just to make things convenient for
> a minority of users, especially if a fix exists that only those people
> affected by the spambloc
29 matches
Mail list logo
