[Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-14 Thread Sergio Barjola
closing this bug because is solved with an updated. ** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu) Status: Incomplete => Invalid -- samba package bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/443109 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu

Re: [Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-14 Thread subhendupandit
No. Thanks a lot --- On Wed, 14/10/09, Sergio Barjola wrote: From: Sergio Barjola Subject: [Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug To: subhendupan...@yahoo.co.in Date: Wednesday, 14 October, 2009, 7:20 PM Have you still having this issue ? Thanks in advance. ** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu

[Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-14 Thread Sergio Barjola
Have you still having this issue ? Thanks in advance. ** Changed in: samba (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- samba package bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/443109 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu-b

[Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-09 Thread Kamus
reassigned to samba package ** Package changed: ubuntu => samba (Ubuntu) -- samba package bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/443109 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.co

Re: [Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-09 Thread subhendupandit
Thanks a lot!! --- On Fri, 9/10/09, Jamie Strandboge wrote: From: Jamie Strandboge Subject: [Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug To: subhendupan...@yahoo.co.in Date: Friday, 9 October, 2009, 3:55 AM Thanks for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. We appreciate

[Bug 443109] Re: samba package bug

2009-10-08 Thread Jamie Strandboge
Thanks for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. We appreciate the difficulties you are facing, but this appears to be a "regular" (non-security) bug. I have unmarked it as a security issue since this bug does not show evidence of allowing attackers to cross privile