On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:39:26PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > AppArmor policy. Now, runtime tests such as autopkgtests may be
> > affected; if needed I could take a look.
[...]
> Note e.g. the -Dorg.openoffice.test.arg.user. Similar (more like what
> was in the bug report in the first place)
binary:libgraphite2-utils is NEW.
binary:libgraphite2-utils is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient.
Packages ar
graphite2_1.3.10-8_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
graphite2_1.3.10-8.dsc
graphite2_1.3.10-8.debian.tar.xz
graphite2_1.3.10-8_amd64.buildinfo
libgraphite2-3-dbgsym_1.3.10-8_amd64.deb
libgraphite2-3_1.3.10-8_amd64.deb
libgraphite2-dev_1.3.10-8_amd64
On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 04:51:43PM +0100, Reiner Herrmann wrote:
> the doxygen documentation available at [0] contains a link to FAQ [1]
> in the top area, which is not available in the package.
> Please include that file as well.
That one just liks to "FAQ" (not doc/FAQ) and the docs are in docs/
binary:libgraphite2-utils is NEW.
binary:libgraphite2-utils is NEW.
Your package has been put into the NEW queue, which requires manual action
from the ftpteam to process. The upload was otherwise valid (it had a good
OpenPGP signature and file hashes are valid), so please be patient.
Packages ar
graphite2_1.3.10-7_arm64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
graphite2_1.3.10-7.dsc
graphite2_1.3.10-7.debian.tar.xz
graphite2_1.3.10-7_arm64.buildinfo
libgraphite2-3-dbgsym_1.3.10-7_arm64.deb
libgraphite2-3_1.3.10-7_arm64.deb
libgraphite2-dev_1.3.10-7_arm64
tag 883800 + pending
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 06:47:38PM +0100, intrig...@debian.org wrote:
> following up on our conversation on #882597, here is a patch series
> that documents how advanced users can adjust the included AppArmor
> profiles to cope with their local setup, and re-enable
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tag 883800 + pending
Bug #883800 [libreoffice-common] libreoffice-common: Please re-enable the
AppArmor profiles
Added tag(s) pending.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
883800: https://bugs.debian.o
intrigeri:
> Rene Engelhard:
>>> that everyone else can't benefit from AppArmor security benefits
>>> due to that, so I'm leaning towards:
>>>
>>> 1. keep the AppArmor profile enforced by default, so the vast
>>> majority of users benefit from it;
>>> 2. ensure the App
Package: libreoffice-common
Version: 1:5.4.3-4
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Hi,
following up on our conversation on #882597, here is a patch series
that documents how advanced users can adjust the included AppArmor
profiles to cope with their local setup, and re-enables the AppArmor
profiles by
Package: libcppunit-doc
Version: 1.14.0-3
Severity: minor
Dear Maintainer,
the doxygen documentation available at [0] contains a link to FAQ [1]
in the top area, which is not available in the package.
Please include that file as well.
Regards,
Reiner
[0] file:///usr/share/doc/libcppunit-doc/h
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 875688 report builder inactive; only legacy reports can be created
> and run
Bug #875688 [libreoffice-report-builder] libreoffice-report-builder: Design
view missing from libre office base. Existing reports won't run.
Changed Bug title t
retitle 875688 report builder inactive; only legacy reports can be created and
run
thanks
For clarity, there are two reporting systems in LibreOffice:
1) Report Design (entirely in C++), the "old legacy one".
2) Report Builder, which used to be an extension, then was a bundled
extension, and
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 882597 libreoffice: Failed to start wiith custom user installation
> when apparmor is running
Bug #882597 {Done: Rene Engelhard } [libreoffice] libreoffice:
Failed to start when apparmor is running because of user rights
Changed Bug titl
Hi Vincas,
Vincas Dargis:
> It's the same story as with Thunderbird's #882218, we really should think
> about
> adding customization points to these GUI applications.
Sure, on the long term allowing advanced users to add drop-in snippets
instead of having to edit conffiles would be great; I'm gl
Hi,
Meta: these bits should not be needed once I've implemented my
proposal, but regardless, I think it's worth spreading AppArmor
knowledge in Debian :)
Rene Engelhard:
> so aa-complain soffice.bin -d $(PKGDIR)-common/etc/apparmor.d/
Yes, this should work.
> etc? (Maybe with full path?)
If th
Hi Rene,
(sorry for the delay, I was focusing on other issues that felt higher
priority than this one, since I've already workaround'ed the
problem successfully.)
Rene Engelhard:
>> that everyone else can't benefit from AppArmor security benefits
>> due to that, so I'm leaning towards:
>>
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 06:41:38PM -0500, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> I don't think users want to create a mathematical formula just to
> create one, but to insert into a document so it makes more sense to
> start Math from within the other app. (Obviously, with an app used by
With that I agree. Above t
18 matches
Mail list logo
