Bug#273056: marked as done (D-I: Network / sources.list configuration issues using apt-proxy.)
Your message dated Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:56:42 +0200
with message-id <20040924105642.GA32015@kitenet.net>
and subject line Bug#273056: D-I: Network / sources.list configuration issues using apt-proxy.
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Sep 2004 16:35:23 +0000
>From andreas.krueger@dv-ratio.com Thu Sep 23 09:35:23 2004
Return-path: <andreas.krueger@dv-ratio.com>
Received: from lgserv.han-solo.net [217.7.85.199] ([MpNg2FDkMCd2/xw1BjqicO8YY/nAXY5j])
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CAWZ0-0007rQ-00; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 09:35:22 -0700
Received: from euklid.nw.dv-ratio.com (p508D0A0B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.141.10.11])
(authenticated bits=0)
by lgserv.han-solo.net (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i8NGYIL9006633
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:34:18 +0200
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=dv-ratio.com)
by euklid.nw.dv-ratio.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1CAWXy-0006FG-00
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:34:18 +0200
Message-ID: <[🔎] 4152FB07.2000709@dv-ratio.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:34:15 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Dr=2E_Andreas_Kr=FCger=22?=
<andreas.krueger@dv-ratio.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040306)
X-Accept-Language: de-de, de-at, de, en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
Subject: D-I: Network / sources.list configuration issues using apt-proxy.
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.2.0
X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="------------enigFCFB90F560B197B7CF6F4DB4"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.1 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_44,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigFCFB90F560B197B7CF6F4DB4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Package: debian-installer
Version: rc1
Severity: minor
I'm currently in the process of installing Sarge on a workstation, using
sarge-i386-netinst.iso retrieved from
http://cdimage.debian.org/pub/cdimage-testing/sarge_d-i/i386/rc1/sarge-i386-netinst.iso
today.
I have both a Squid and an apt-proxy server running in this LAN.
I decided to enter my sources.list manually. The first time round, I mistyped. I
got my second chance, very good! So far, so smooth sailing.
Pretty much immediately thereafter, I was asked about which HTTP proxy to use.
What's that about? The question left me confused. (Maybe I didn't read the
screen carefully enough. If that is the case, please pardon me.)
I declined giving an answer, as I did not understand why that would be useful.
As a matter of fact, out of sheer configuration lazyness you can actually reach
the apt-proxy through the Squid. But I certainly do not want the new box to
actually do that.
Only a moment later it became clear to me that this question was asked on behalf
of Debian security updates.
This is needlessly confusing.
My suggestion:
In the best Debian tradition, D-I should assume a person who edits manually
knows what she is doing.
Provide a template, yes. Drop the security line into sources.list, with an
appropriate commentary, *before* the editor is fired, yes. Once we are at it,
please add example lines for http_proxy and ftp_proxy, as comments. And then
leave it at that, whatever comes out of the editor.
Regards, and thank you for providing fine software
Andreas
--
Dr. Andreas Krüger, andreas.krueger@dv-ratio.com
GPG/PGP Fingerprint 8063 4A9B 362D 4220 A546 14C1 EA19 AADC FD44 5EB7
DV-RATIO Nordwest GmbH, Tel.: +49 211 577 996-0, Fax: +49 211 559 1617
Leostraße 31, 40545 Düsseldorf, Germany
--------------enigFCFB90F560B197B7CF6F4DB4
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFBUvsI6hmq3P1EXrcRAsx/AJsEP3DFXV7Et/pOyEIU5F7QgRNgkwCgoOBS
YV3cvm5UazHy1UZnW5tqhzs=
=bx9B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigFCFB90F560B197B7CF6F4DB4--
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 273056-done) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Sep 2004 13:34:36 +0000
>From joey@kitenet.net Fri Sep 24 06:34:36 2004
Return-path: <joey@kitenet.net>
Received: from kitenet.net [64.62.161.42] (postfix)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CAqDc-0001am-00; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:34:36 -0700
Received: from dragon.kitenet.net (dhcp-sn164-08.hrz.uni-oldenburg.de [134.106.164.18])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(Client CN "Joey Hess", Issuer "Joey Hess" (verified OK))
by kitenet.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 850CD18FB6
for <273056-done@bugs.debian.org>; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:26:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: by dragon.kitenet.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 69B256E781; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:56:42 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:56:42 +0200
From: Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>
To: 273056-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#273056: D-I: Network / sources.list configuration issues using apt-proxy.
Message-ID: <20040924105642.GA32015@kitenet.net>
References: <[🔎] 4152FB07.2000709@dv-ratio.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 4152FB07.2000709@dv-ratio.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040818i
Delivered-To: 273056-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
--n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Dr. Andreas Kr=FCger" wrote:
> Only a moment later it became clear to me that this question was asked on=
=20
> behalf of Debian security updates.
This has already been fixed in base-config after rc1.
--=20
see shy jo
--n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBU/1pd8HHehbQuO8RAqpeAKCovBvqUdig2wUA/2xVf8EqNBrDkACgi4kq
BfQGJaWTYMvEu20yjLwQshI=
=7oHJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--n8g4imXOkfNTN/H1--
Reply to: