[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Security in sarge

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Tobias Stefan Richter wrote:
> vorlon@debian.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2004 at 05:12:15PM +0200, Tobias Stefan Richter wrote:
> > > > rlpr is in the same state as pavuk above.

> > > I didn't look into pavuk, but rlpr has as far as I see no weird state.

> > You seem to be right, though previous attempts to cleanly remove this
> > package from testing had failed.

> > > The latest Debian version is from the above DSA (2.02-7woody1), which 
> > > could savely be included in sarge. Upstream has 2.05, though.
> > > I would not like to see it removed.

> > Are you willing to maintain the package yourself?

> I'd be willing, but I'm not a DD (yet). 
> I am an advanced user and did some private packaging before, but didn't 
> find anything useful and unmaintained to help with. So if anyone would
> sponsor me maintaining rlpr, I could and would help out.

> On the other hand rlpr isn't officially ophaned, maybe a DD would pick
> this rather small package up, if that was the case. Would be a quicker move.

It would be good if you would try to work this out together with the
current maintainer, and if necessary, the debian-qa mailing list.  Brian
may be willing to sponsor you even if he doesn't have time to maintain
rlpr himself anymore; and if not, the debian-qa team can help you get
the package orphaned so that you can set about finding a sponsor or
NMUer the usual way.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: