On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 11:04:22AM +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Obviously I've done something wrong because on a virgin Squeeze
> install /etc/apt/sources.list has no repos other than the disc! Can
> someone please send to me a copy of this file. Custom added repos are
> fine, I'll be able to figure
thanks for the replies. replying to Karl's message so that it goes
into the list archive.
so, my thoughts so far:
wikipedia needs updating on this front.
cdist looks pretty simple - i think i could have it up for what i'm
using in a matter of minutes.
cfengine looks pretty old school and it probab
Hi
In addition to connectivity problems, I've been having problems setting
up my USB Epson printer with CUPS. For one thing, the CUPS admin
interface has changed since I last did this, and CUPS doesn't detect the
printer as a local printer only giving me 3 options - scsi printer, HP
printer
On 06/05/11 23:50, Arno Schuring wrote:
AG (computing.acco...@googlemail.com on 2011-05-06 19:12 +0100):
sudo ifconfig
loLink encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
On 07/05/11 00:56, shawn wilson wrote:
i'd prefer the system have some sort of ajax, soap, xml, syslog, or
snmp v3 output (in order of preference - can ya tell how i feel about
snmp?). but, i suppose i can parse and spit out pretty much any output
if need be.
What information are you looking to
I have used cfengine2 and cfengine3, and I am currently learning puppet.
These are roughly equivalent functionalities, with cfengine being the
grandfather of all of them (circa 1993, iirc). One thing I have found is
your programming preferences could help make the decision for you. cfengine
is vagu
not sure how topical this here - as i'm not looking for anything
debian specific. i'm looking at using some type of configuration
management software. i have never used any of this software before, i
just think i'm outgrowing svn and scp :)
i've found this wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar
Hi there. I made a nautilus script so that I can right-click on a file,
use it in a program, and then move the produced file back to the working
directory.
I made a test script to try it out.
#!/bin/bash
echo "$1" $HOME/Desktop/test.txt
When I am in any Nautilus folder and I right-click on a fi
AG (computing.acco...@googlemail.com on 2011-05-06 19:12 +0100):
> sudo ifconfig
> loLink encap:Local Loopback
> inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
> inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
> RX packets:11601 errors:
On 5/6/2011 10:45 AM, Camaleón wrote:
On Fri, 06 May 2011 08:56:35 -0400, Christopher Judd wrote:
Is it normal to have multiple instances of udev daemon running?
user@gibbs:~/data/icp-ms/Routine/2011/Agilent7500$ ps aux | grep udev
root 381 0.0 0.0 21424 848 ?Ss Ma
Dotan Cohen (dotanco...@gmail.com on 2011-05-06 23:07 +0300):
>
> No, this is not a matter of preference. There is no reason to pipe the
> links through some third party service
[..]
>
> What advantage exists at all to use tinyURL?
While I share your sentiment in general (I would never click on a
On 06/05/11 21:37, Wolfgang Karall wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 05:00:18PM +0100, Dom wrote:
However, libpam-opie seems to have been dropped by Debian after squeeze,
due to lack of support, some security issues, and no updates for quite a
few years.
I run Wheezy, is there a supported
On 06/05/11 22:37, Wolfgang Karall wrote:
Hello,
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 05:00:18PM +0100, Dom wrote:
However, libpam-opie seems to have been dropped by Debian after squeeze,
due to lack of support, some security issues, and no updates for quite a
few years.
I run Wheezy, is there a supporte
Hello,
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 05:00:18PM +0100, Dom wrote:
> However, libpam-opie seems to have been dropped by Debian after squeeze,
> due to lack of support, some security issues, and no updates for quite a
> few years.
>
> I run Wheezy, is there a supported alternative to libpam-opie?
A q
On 6 May 2011 21:02, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>
>
> I appreciate your willingness to help, don't get me wrong. But just as
> I am here to learn, I thought that you might also be interested in
> learning the error of using url-shortening services.
Oh, I remember you now.
> I apologise if I
> steppe
Hi Debian users,
Are you interested in getting involved in contributing to Debian, perhaps
as a package maintainer?
Margarita (through debian-women) and I (through OpenHatch) are doing a
simple "Build It" event to teach people how to take a Debian source
package, build it into a .deb, and th
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 11:00:49AM +, Camaleón wrote:
> On Thu, 05 May 2011 20:18:25 -0700, David wrote:
>
> > I may be out of the loop on this. But I just discovered kupfer and was
> > duly impressed.
> >
> > I generally stay away from launchers because, with the exception of
> > gmrun, I fi
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 16:32, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 06 May 2011 15:47:42 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:28, Camaleón wrote:
Still is for me.
>>>
>>> It works here but anyway, you can use a TinyURL decoder:
>>>
>>> http://kiserai.net/turl.pl
>>>
>>>
>> Still 500.
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 01:45:38AM -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
> On May 5, 2011 11:19 PM, "Freeman" wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 08:35:39PM -0700, giovanni_re wrote:
> > >
> > > =
> > > So, today's poll is:
> > >
> > > What Smartphone do you use?
> > >
> >
> > Android maybe just got a few
Robert Brockway wrote:
> Yes it would keep logs a bit cleaner. I've never[1] changed the ssh port
> on any host and never been terribly worried about the state of the logs as
> a result.
I tend to take a different view: if I can get rid of "rubbish" from the
logs then it makes it easier for a
On Fri, 06 May 2011 20:04:36 +0200, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
> On 2011-05-06 20:02, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
>> On 2011-05-06 19:46, Camaleón wrote:
(...)
There is an additional '>' char at the beginning of the 3rd line of
the body (nothing was quoted in this e-mail, it was a "new
Hmmm ... apparently not:
sudo ifconfig
loLink encap:Local Loopback
inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
RX packets:11601 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets
On 2011-05-06 20:02, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
> On 2011-05-06 19:46, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 May 2011 19:08:11 +0200, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
>>
>>> Today I sent an e-mail from my Icedove 2.0.0.24 and I am pretty sure it
>>> looks different in my Sent folder (and in Sent folder file) tha
On 2011-05-06 19:46, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 06 May 2011 19:08:11 +0200, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
>
>> Today I sent an e-mail from my Icedove 2.0.0.24 and I am pretty sure it
>> looks different in my Sent folder (and in Sent folder file) than it was
>> when I was sending it.
>>
>> There is an
Le Fri 6/05/2011, Camaleón disait
> On Fri, 06 May 2011 19:08:11 +0200, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
>
> > Today I sent an e-mail from my Icedove 2.0.0.24 and I am pretty sure it
> > looks different in my Sent folder (and in Sent folder file) than it was
> > when I was sending it.
> >
> > There is
On Fri, 06 May 2011 19:08:11 +0200, Stanisław Findeisen wrote:
> Today I sent an e-mail from my Icedove 2.0.0.24 and I am pretty sure it
> looks different in my Sent folder (and in Sent folder file) than it was
> when I was sending it.
>
> There is an additional '>' char at the beginning of the 3
This just started after my most recent (very painful) dist-upgrade. It seems
that BTRFS is not compatible with grub and Debian. I very nearly lost my whole
system because of this catastrophe.
Does anyone know the nature of the error and how to fix?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-r
In <4dc426d9.7030...@vru.uho.edu.cu>, Alexey Leyva wrote:
>help
You'll have to be more specific.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/
Today I sent an e-mail from my Icedove 2.0.0.24 and I am pretty sure it
looks different in my Sent folder (and in Sent folder file) than it was
when I was sending it.
There is an additional '>' char at the beginning of the 3rd line of the
body (nothing was quoted in this e-mail, it was a "new mail
help
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dc426d9.7030...@vru.uho.edu.cu
On Fri, 6 May 2011, Brian wrote:
A strong password is no less secure in brute force terms than a key so
Oh yes it is. A strong password may take a very long time to brute force,
but that isn't what you said.
Breaking an arbitrarily long key pair is regarded as being
cryptographically infe
On Fri, 06 May 2011 17:23:45 +0100, AG wrote:
> Sometime over the last 9 days I have updated my testing desktop system
> and when I went to reboot the theme settings on Gnome had changed and I
> am unable to access the Internet.
>
> My partner's machine - from which this is sent - can access the
In <20110506155703.ga2...@big.lan.gnu>, Paul E Condon wrote:
>Note that none of these five lines (in two different files on two different
>hosts) contain 'volatile'.
As expected for squeeze and above. The services previously provided by
volatile.debian.org and its completely separate mirror syst
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:23 PM, AG wrote:
Hey list
>
> Sometime over the last 9 days I have updated my testing desktop system and
> when I went to reboot the theme settings on Gnome had changed and I am
> unable to access the Internet.
>
> My partner's machine - from which this is sent - can acc
Hey list
Sometime over the last 9 days I have updated my testing desktop system and
when I went to reboot the theme settings on Gnome had changed and I am
unable to access the Internet.
My partner's machine - from which this is sent - can access the Net fine. I
could until I rebooted. I've crea
On Thu, 5 May 2011, Rob Owens wrote:
I hesitate to mention this, because it will start an argument about
security through obscurity, but you can run your ssh server on a port
other than 22. It really does nothing for security, but it will keep
your firewall logs a lot cleaner because it avoids
Hello,
On 6/5/2011 15:00 Christopher Judd wrote:
> Is it normal to have multiple instances of udev daemon running?
I don't know if it is "normal". But on my system, I have three instances
of udev daemon as well.
Cheers,
Simon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.
Hi folks
On 06/05/11 16:33, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
Hello List !
For the "connect from untrusted computers" there are one-time-passwords.
I've used libpam-opie in the past with great success for the occasional
connection from internet cafe's for example.
By googling, I found this web page:
h
On 20110506_092810, Gilles Mocellin wrote:
> Le Friday 06 May 2011 07:15:37 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr., vous avez écrit :
> > In <20110505230413.ga4...@big.lan.gnu>, Paul E Condon wrote:
> > >On 20110505_164439, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > >> On 2011-05-05 16:15:31 Paul E Condon wrote:
> > >> >#v
On 05/06/2011 02:50 PM, cac...@quantum-sci.com wrote:
On Friday 6 May, 2011 05:15:23 Brian wrote:
What you're missing is the difference between someone trying to hack from the
client machine... and a remote script trying to brute-force your server. Big
difference.
No I'm not. But p
On Fri, 06 May 2011, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 06 May 2011 08:56:35 -0400, Christopher Judd wrote:
> > Is it normal to have multiple instances of udev daemon running?
> >
> > user@gibbs:~/data/icp-ms/Routine/2011/Agilent7500$ ps aux | grep udev
> > root 381 0.0 0.0 21424 848 ?
On Fri, 06 May 2011 08:56:35 -0400, Christopher Judd wrote:
> Is it normal to have multiple instances of udev daemon running?
>
> user@gibbs:~/data/icp-ms/Routine/2011/Agilent7500$ ps aux | grep udev
> root 381 0.0 0.0 21424 848 ?Ss May05 0:00 udevd
> --daemon
> root
Hello List !
For the "connect from untrusted computers" there are one-time-passwords.
I've used libpam-opie in the past with great success for the occasional
connection from internet cafe's for example.
By googling, I found this web page:
http://andrewho.co.uk/weblog/securing-authentication
2011/5/5 Dominique Dumont
> Le jeudi 5 mai 2011 17:29:54, vous avez écrit :
> > What should I verify before updating/upgrading a sid/experimental system?
> if aptitude wants to remove a lot of perl package, just put on hold all
> perl-5.12 packages. This will enable you to update non-Perl package
On Fri, 06 May 2011 15:47:42 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:28, Camaleón wrote:
>>> Still is for me.
>>
>> It works here but anyway, you can use a TinyURL decoder:
>>
>> http://kiserai.net/turl.pl
>>
>>
> Still 500. That's a server error, not a network error. I'm surprised
>
On 06/05/11 15:11, Wolfgang Karall wrote:
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Brian wrote:
Keyloggers would get the key passphrase too. And the USB stick
would have its contents pilfered. So, keys don't appear to give any
advantage over passwords on an untrusted machine.
combined with
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Brian wrote:
> Keyloggers would get the key passphrase too. And the USB stick
> would have its contents pilfered. So, keys don't appear to give any
> advantage over passwords on an untrusted machine.
For the "connect from untrusted computers" there are one
Hi,
Is it normal to have multiple instances of udev daemon running?
user@gibbs:~/data/icp-ms/Routine/2011/Agilent7500$ ps aux | grep udev
root 381 0.0 0.0 21424 848 ?Ss May05 0:00 udevd --
daemon
root 7189 0.0 0.0 21420 472 ?SMay05 0:00 udev
On Friday 6 May, 2011 05:08:52 Brian wrote:
> I'm unsure whether you mean 'prevent' because neither keys nor passwords
> can stop brute forcing attempts. If you mean a key (256 characters) is
> stronger than a password (20 characters) I'd agree. But the key is no
> more secure than the password. No
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:08, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 06 May 2011 at 13:48:23 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>
>> However, keys are good to prevent brute-force attacks. Think of it
>> like a 256-character password using the entire ASCII field. Also, keys
>> are not susceptible to keyloggers.
>
> I'm unsu
On Friday 6 May, 2011 05:15:23 Brian wrote:
> > What you're missing is the difference between someone trying to hack from
> > the
> > client machine... and a remote script trying to brute-force your server.
> > Big
> > difference.
>
> No I'm not. But please explain the difference, bearing in mi
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 15:28, Camaleón wrote:
>> Still is for me.
>
> It works here but anyway, you can use a TinyURL decoder:
>
> http://kiserai.net/turl.pl
>
Still 500. That's a server error, not a network error. I'm surprised
that it works for anybody. All I can think of here is geographic loa
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 04:51:16 -0700, cac...@quantum-sci.com wrote:
> On Friday 6 May, 2011 02:13:52 Brian wrote:
> > A strong password is no less secure in brute force terms than a key so
> > there is no reason to disallow it on those grounds. You can also be sure
> > you have never left it at ho
On Fri, 06 May 2011 14:02:47 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:57, Heddle Weaver
> wrote:
>>> The tinyurl server is giving a 500 error. Why on earth would you add
>>> an unreliable, third-party link to the already fragile chain of HTTP?
>>
>> It didn't then and it doesn't now.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:23, George wrote:
>> No, the attacker needs to HAVE your private key and KNOW the pass phrase
>> for that key. Assuming you keep your key secure and have a decent pass
>> phrase his life should be very difficult indeed.
>
> He still needs to guess a string, just like he d
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 13:48:23 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> However, keys are good to prevent brute-force attacks. Think of it
> like a 256-character password using the entire ASCII field. Also, keys
> are not susceptible to keyloggers.
I'm unsure whether you mean 'prevent' because neither keys no
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 14:45, Brian wrote:
>> Could you please expand on this a bit please. I'm not sure that I
>> understand the relevance. If there is some fine document that I should
>> be reading then a link to it would be appreciated. I like to read the
>> fine manual, but for this hole in my
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 13:39:48 +0300, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Could you please expand on this a bit please. I'm not sure that I
> understand the relevance. If there is some fine document that I should
> be reading then a link to it would be appreciated. I like to read the
> fine manual, but for this
Hello,
phpBB's new version ( 3.0.8 ) is now available .We recommend that you update
your forum to fix some security bugs in earlier versions .
We provide paid services , Beside updating your forum we can :
+ Design for you a professional unique style with completely
new icons a
On Friday 6 May, 2011 02:13:52 Brian wrote:
> A strong password is no less secure in brute force terms than a key so
> there is no reason to disallow it on those grounds. You can also be sure
> you have never left it at home or elsewhere.
What you're missing is the difference between someone tryin
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:57, Heddle Weaver wrote:
>> The tinyurl server is giving a 500 error. Why on earth would you add
>> an unreliable, third-party link to the already fragile chain of HTTP?
>
> It didn't then and it doesn't now.
Still is for me.
>>
>> I for one do not want tinyurl or any o
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:43, Brian wrote:
>> I'm prepared to be wrong here but, aren't the hosts.* configs just for inetd
>> / xinetd and (possibly) portmap? And, IIRC, ssh installs as an init script
>> on debian?
>
> Daemons can also be linked against libwrap. sshd is (ldd /usr/sbin/sshd).
>
Co
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:13, Brian wrote:
>> You could run Debian Live on a USB stick (or any other live distro,
>> really). Boot your work machine with that, and you will have a trusted
>> machine. Use that to ssh to your home machine.
>
> I suppose this 'trusted machine' doesn't have a key lo
On Thu, 05 May 2011 20:18:25 -0700, David wrote:
> I may be out of the loop on this. But I just discovered kupfer and was
> duly impressed.
>
> I generally stay away from launchers because, with the exception of
> gmrun, I find them over-stuffed and awkward.
>
> Although I can't get kupfer compl
George:
> On 5/6/11, Jochen Schulz wrote:
>
>> You can authenticate to an OpenSSH server using a password, or using a
>> keyfile. On the client side, simply run 'ssh-keygen' to create a
>> keypair.
>
> So the attacker needs to guess my private key instead of my password.
Exactly.
> How does th
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:02, Tom Furie wrote:
> No, the attacker needs to HAVE your private key and KNOW the pass phrase
> for that key. Assuming you keep your key secure and have a decent pass
> phrase his life should be very difficult indeed.
>
Yes, but using that key on a computer that he doe
On Thu, 05 May 2011 21:08:05 +0100, Tom Furie wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 07:21:22PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 May 2011 18:12:47 +0100, Andrew Wood wrote:
>
>> > For certain things like removing OpenOffice and replacing it with
>> > LibreOffice this approach works but is time cons
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 09:06, shawn wilson wrote:
>> I suppose you could keep your public key with you on a USB drive and
>> only put it on the computer when you need it, however I'm not sure how
>> secure that would be :/
>>
>
> Something you have - thumb drive
> Something you know - the ip / nam
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 11:54:28 +0300, George wrote:
> So the attacker needs to guess my private key instead of my password.
> How does that make his life more difficult, assuming my password was
> very strong?
It is easy to construct a password which would take 10,000 years to
guess or brute forc
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 02:06:17 -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
> Something you have - thumb drive
> Something you know - the ip / name of your machine
With an untrusted machine on a network you do not control both are
capable of becoming the property of someone else.
> It's two factor enough imo.
>
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 10:05:28AM CEST, Mathieu Malaterre
said:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Rob Hurle wrote:
> ...
> > Lenny to Squeeze. I ran out of space, but a quick symlink to get
> > /usr/share on to another partition fixed that. The community on this
>
> Why not simply use LVM a
On Thu 05 May 2011 at 20:54:12 -0400, Rob Owens wrote:
> You could run Debian Live on a USB stick (or any other live distro,
> really). Boot your work machine with that, and you will have a trusted
> machine. Use that to ssh to your home machine.
I suppose this 'trusted machine' doesn't have a
Rob Owens wrote:
> [...] you can run your ssh server on a port other than 22
I can thoroughly recommend this. Actually, to be pedantic, you can set
port forwarding from your router's port N to your server's port 22.
Other people have mentioned that you should put AllowUsers in your
sshd_config f
On 5/6/11, Tom Furie wrote:
>> So the attacker needs to guess my private key instead of my password.
>> How does that make his life more difficult, assuming my password was
>> very strong?
>
> No, the attacker needs to HAVE your private key and KNOW the pass phrase
> for that key. Assuming you ke
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 11:54:28AM +0300, George wrote:
> On 5/6/11, Jochen Schulz wrote:
>
> > You can authenticate to an OpenSSH server using a password, or using a
> > keyfile. On the client side, simply run 'ssh-keygen' to create a
> > keypair.
>
> So the attacker needs to guess my private k
On Fri 06 May 2011 at 01:59:10 -0400, shawn wilson wrote:
> I'm prepared to be wrong here but, aren't the hosts.* configs just for inetd
> / xinetd and (possibly) portmap? And, IIRC, ssh installs as an init script
> on debian?
Daemons can also be linked against libwrap. sshd is (ldd /usr/sbin/ssh
On 5/6/11, Jochen Schulz wrote:
> You can authenticate to an OpenSSH server using a password, or using a
> keyfile. On the client side, simply run 'ssh-keygen' to create a
> keypair.
So the attacker needs to guess my private key instead of my password.
How does that make his life more difficult,
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 04:54, Stephen Powell wrote:
> There is a sample /etc/apt/sources.list file on my kernel-building web page:
>
> http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm
>
> Look for it under "Step 1: Update Your sources.list File"
>
That is a terrific page, Stephen. Thank you!
--
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Rob Hurle wrote:
...
> Lenny to Squeeze. I ran out of space, but a quick symlink to get
> /usr/share on to another partition fixed that. The community on this
Why not simply use LVM and resize the /usr partition ?
--
Mathieu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debia
Thank you team Debian. I'm a refugee from FreeBSD, which I've been
using since version 2.2.something. FreeBSD is a great system and I've
installed servers in Government departments, schools, etc, and I used
it for quite a while on my desktop. However, Debian beats it in the
ancillary software s
George:
> On 5/6/11, Jochen Schulz wrote:
>
>> If you only allowing key-based authentication and install security
>> patches in a timely manner, the risk from running a public OpenSSH
>> server is low. Expect brute-force attempts to login using weak
>> passwords, though. If you only allow key log
Le Friday 06 May 2011 07:15:37 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr., vous avez écrit :
> In <20110505230413.ga4...@big.lan.gnu>, Paul E Condon wrote:
> >On 20110505_164439, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> >> On 2011-05-05 16:15:31 Paul E Condon wrote:
> >> >#volatile http://volatile.debian.org/debian-volat
82 matches
Mail list logo
