Accepted pam-geoip 1.1-2 (source amd64) into unstable
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2015 20:24:12 +0200
Source: pam-geoip
Binary: libpam-geoip
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.1-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Patrick Matthäi <pmatthaei@debian.org>
Changed-By: Patrick Matthäi <pmatthaei@debian.org>
Description:
libpam-geoip - PAM module checking access of source IPs with a GeoIP database
Changes:
pam-geoip (1.1-2) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.6 (no changes needed).
* Don't explicitly request xz compression - dpkg 1.17 does this by default.
* Remove deprecated hardening-wrapper.
* Suggest geoip-database-extra main package from now on.
* Update to DEP5 debian/copyright format.
* Overwrite lintian warning debian-watch-may-check-gpg-signature. There is no
signature available.
* Overwrite false positive hardening-no-relro lintian warning.
Checksums-Sha1:
9f1d086809f0338e5933110bf606384bd5274547 1727 pam-geoip_1.1-2.dsc
49a3c2e7ea974eadffb571e0cc4a8ab3e6d989d4 2880 pam-geoip_1.1-2.debian.tar.xz
ec6ac0e17963e3bac2df35399e74a9cc4950ae7f 16178 libpam-geoip_1.1-2_amd64.deb
Checksums-Sha256:
1b9900a02bc8661365f65d13a237f99088da45754c20435d27b8ed2293e3be46 1727 pam-geoip_1.1-2.dsc
a3ba089c526150b0b6e39a77c623c80fd3191366563582bad18decc8791b7d9c 2880 pam-geoip_1.1-2.debian.tar.xz
4e3821fbdad64211e55b6c0069d934c67e7097764910d4adabab26dea37343c8 16178 libpam-geoip_1.1-2_amd64.deb
Files:
458b61bdba6071f79dab96f80ac7f1fd 1727 admin optional pam-geoip_1.1-2.dsc
6c29adf25e689fb38c6fd2206c9991f3 2880 admin optional pam-geoip_1.1-2.debian.tar.xz
aaf2cbd9746b7bfa498f4c0c5d9c3be7 16178 admin optional libpam-geoip_1.1-2_amd64.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJVnXNFAAoJEBLZsEqQy9jkaroP/2z7QqGXVjLpwjloVg6GaLP0
Cql/qmT5bIAxnyuUUkDHw+TIxJqlAaF5VgGFPnTWHJq3W0V2HsFGW6njM7ggfrT2
rK5N1PwLCRAbTcxErOAjmeeq7ZUZaX3pUCzMTSAC7fItg35zkX7D+hxsBXF84CzX
UuxuRpCXV8rYre8+1hOriLV5drXUyqMeHqtjitmj16dEVgo+CcoYP+kWyDcNGLrw
bUcK7/kIgXKnftK+tXirqRvPLhmdXg0irK57Gk4yVPNcbma4Xbsi0XxB1B4qPpov
4KJ6FsaV9k2PRcc4QkYSkT5lE7J9G0ylg6KqJYlDaBnBs2dvRoZOvLGkAGnYAFW/
UGGc9JSPuNoKb0a7Z2/kI3NswzqjMOy0dWCyJ4hVY8tvysgEN6zNftAvEaQrBvkp
HpUG7in6VNcNC0djksDAnUQtQKpiDs53bTauzJ3T1F3U9r/i024VER+tX482lxGH
aNZKmkfIAgsEyujRamW1bo+mg0oN/Hkri5zfbJtEshihzYnz08t0SDrFTfe3yORm
LGS+Rtivy8pHkQBo7Ln3piXRpmtJ5LjGnTAYkuTVAOV5NIA4VdPouGHRhoUuiK8N
kb3A//Pj8sCP4o3Uebc/8ruG2Ei13pnv5MplxyNuuWxbZz41XD5oqJRChvr81npt
S9rQ8AInxGPZIuU3fpa1
=itak
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: